The Resolution Will Not Be Televised

Friday, January 15, 2010

Transcript

It was supposed to be an experiment: cameras in the courtroom for a high profile gay marriage case in San Francisco, with the footage on YouTube and in a handful of other courtrooms across the country. But then on Monday the Supreme Court shut the experiment down and, according to the New York Times’ Adam Liptak, thereby sent a message about where the Court stands in the debate over cameras in the courts.

Comments [1]

Dick Paddock from Chapel Hill, NC

I note that you commented the people the SCOTUS claimed to have concern for, the defendant's witnesses, were in fact apparently professionals either paid or volunteering and therefore likely to be accustomed to such (speculated) harassment.

Why no concern for the plaintiffs? And why didn't you ask? Real world experience may show that people in the defendants' camp may be harassed, but the only parties for whom hate crimes legislation exists or is contemplated, would be the plaintiffs.

Thanks for your consideration.

And congrats (belated, of course) for landing Lou Rawls!

Jan. 21 2010 11:28 AM

Leave a Comment

Email addresses are required but never displayed.