Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Constitutional Law Blogs -> First Amendment Center
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Constitutional Law
: First Amendment CenterBreyer unsure about cameras in high court
By By The Associated Press
WASHINGTON ? Justice Stephen Breyer says it's important for television viewers to see Supreme Court justices in their black robes when the president delivers the State of the Union speech each year. He's less certain that TV cameras have a place at the Court.
When the justices take their seats among lawmakers, military brass and Cabinet members for the president's annual address to Congress, the public can see the whole government in one place, he said.
"Maybe some will wonder, 'Who are those people in black robes?' If they wonder, they might read about it and if they do they'll learn more about the government," Breyer said in an interview with the Associated Press to talk about another way to educate the public, his new book Making Our Democracy Work.
Breyer, 72, joined the high court 16 years ago, a nominee of President Bill Clinton. He has attended almost every State of the Union since, including the address in January when President Barack Obama criticized the Court's decision of a few days earlier in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which struck down some campaign-finance laws. A dissenter in that case, he said he wasn't bothered by Obama's criticism.
Breyer acknowledged that allowing TV viewers to see the Court in action, at the 80 or so arguments it hears each year, would convey "that the Court is very serious about dealing with very difficult problems."
But he said he remained concerned that coverage of the Court would turn into a succession of "sound bites" that might be ultimately misleading. Worse, he said, would be if televising high court arguments were to lead to "television in every criminal trial in the United States and witnesses began to become afraid to appear."
"So I'm taking a hesitant attitude," Breyer said, while calling for independent research to assess television coverage in state courts around the nation.
Showing people how the high court works is the aim of Breyer's book tracing the country's acceptance of the Court as the final word in legal disputes, he said over tea in his Supreme Court office.
He said the Court has struggled in some of its most important decisions with finding a balance between national security and civil liberties. The decision that ratified the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II was a stain on the court, he said. But he believes that history helped lead to different outcomes in recent rulings that extended some constitutional protections to detainees at the Guantanamo Bay naval prison.
"The public has to generally accept the existence of an institution that to do its job must sometimes make decisions that are very unpopular," Breyer said. "In addition, since we are dealing with fallible human beings and not angels, sometimes those decisions will be wrong."
His second book in five years also sets out Breyer's judicial philosophy of "prudence and pragmatism," in contrast to the originalist views of Justice Antonin Scalia. Breyer says he believes judges sometimes must be guided by more than the language of laws, if the words are ambiguous or embody a value that must be applied to specific circumstances.
Scalia's text-based approach focuses on giving a fair reading to the words of the Constitution as they were meant when they were written.
Scalia and the other conservative justices have had the upper hand on the Court over Breyer and the other liberals since Justice Sandra Day O'Connor retired in 2006 and was replaced by Justice Samuel Alito.
"Five years ago, I think I was in the majority more than anybody. Now I'm probably more in dissent," he said.
Breyer both concedes that the Court has changed and rejects the ideological labels as simplistic.
"My object here is not to say that political kinds of influence are zero," he said. "I just want to say that's not the right word. It doesn't describe things accurately. I'd say it's not a single set of words."
Full post as published by First Amendment Center on October 10, 2010 (boomark / email).
Selection of State Supreme Court Judges
How State Court Judges are Selected
Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Career Choices
Descriptions of law enforcement occupations
California Supreme Court Proposition 8 Decision
Court Rejects Challenges to Proposition 8, but Finds Marriages Valid
Is Barack Obama a Natural Born Citizen?
Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz (Supreme Court): Does Obama meet the constitutional requirements to be President
Heart of Atlanta v United States
Supreme Court Decision: Civil Rights Act Protected by Interstate Commerce Clause
Unwed Fathers' Rights in Adoption
Landmark Cases in Adoption Law Shape Law with respect to Unwed Fathers
Ebay Fined
French Court Sets Fine at $61 Million
Personal Injury
Appeals Court Upholds Congressional Legislation
BMW Faces Class Action over High Pressure Fuel Pumps
BMW Faces Class Action over High Pressure Fuel Pumps
Tomato Salmonella
Sheetz Convenience Stores agrees to confidential out-of-court settlement with food poisoning victim.
National Association of Realtors
Settlement reached in broker listing antitrust lawsuit, pending court approval.
Missouri Attorney General's Office
$26,000 settlement reached in disability discrimination lawsuit, pending court approval.

"AP interview: Breyer unsure about cameras at court."
Before House Appropriations Committee, Thomas, Breyer discuss High Court docket, clerks, cameras
Thomas, Breyer Discuss High Court Docket, Clerks, Cameras
Specter Chides High Court, Renews Cameras Debate
Justice Breyer analyzes rule of law in Yale talk
Justice Breyer predicts a flood of Supreme Court cases about the new health care law.







