Post by Hoosier Hillbilly on Feb 21, 2013 6:03:41 GMT -5
Cameras in the Court
02/20/2013
The justices of the Supreme Court have rejected the idea of video coverage of arguments before the court, explaining that Americans would be incapable of comprehending what they were seeing.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor justified the decision, saying, “very few of them understand what the process is.”
“It’s not because they’re stupid, although they are,” growled Justice Antonin Scalia,” it’s just because we’re so incredibly much smarter.”
“For example,” said Justice Samuel Alito, “I doubt one percent of Americans could follow the arcane logic that led to the inescapable legal conclusion that corporations, even though they are soulless, lifeless artificial legal constructs, are actually people.”
“Or,” chimed in Justice Anthony Kennedy, “that money and speech are identical as far as the law is concerned. It doesn’t make sense to the average person that a corporation can secretly stuff unlimited cash into a campaign coffer, and that’s the same thing as some poor schmuck standing on a street corner trying to get someone’s attention. People would just be confused trying to unravel the arguments if they saw us in action.”
Chief Justice John Roberts asserted, “it would have created unneeded controversy at a very emotional time if the voters actually saw how we made George W. Bush president, despite some pretty compelling evidence that Al Gore actually won. They wouldn’t have understood the highly abstruse reasoning behind that decision. They might have concluded that it was a completely unwarranted and unprecedented decision by a court that arrogantly and recklessly inserted itself into partisan politics, instead of the finely-reasoned determination that in fact it was.
“Plus,” he continued, “it wouldn’t have served this court or the nation if people had been able to see the look on Scalia’s face when I voted in favor of Obamacare. You really wouldn’t have wanted that showing up on Youtube.”
Alito wondered, “would you honestly want the public to see Clarence (referring to Justice Thomas) just sitting there day after day never saying a word? They might conclude that he’s only there as a token black who reliably votes with the conservative bloc. What would that do to the public perception of the court as a legitimate body?
“For that matter,” he went on, “I don’t think anyone outside this room wants to watch Scalia when he gets rolling on one of his tirades. I love the guy like a brother, but the full Antonin when he goes off is hard even for me to take.”
“Not all of us are all that photogenic, either,” said Justice Elena Kagan. “People might spot Ruth Ginsburg and wonder why there’s a garden gnome on the bench.”
“So,” Roberts concluded, “we’re not going to televise the proceedings of this court. When we really thought about it, the negatives so outweighed the positives, it was a no-brainer. When it came right down to it, it was as easy as refusing to stay an execution.
“All eight of us agreed. No cameras. Justice Thomas didn’t say anything, as usual, but we assume he concurs.”