|
Supreme Court of the United States, televised, refers to the debate over televising proceedings of the Supreme Court of the United States. The Court has never allowed cameras in its courtroom, but it does make audiotapes of oral arguments and opinions available to the public.〔Tong, Lorraine H. ("Televising Supreme Court and Other Federal Court Proceedings: Legislation and Issues" ) Congressional Research Service of the Library of Congress (November 8, 2006)〕 In 2009, Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter, and seven co-sponsors introduced a resolution to express the sense of Congress that sessions of the Court should be televised.〔 In 2009, Specter also introduced a bill that would require open sessions of the Court to be televised.〔 Ted Poe, R-TX2, introduced a related bill in the House of Representatives in January 2009.〔( H.R.429 ) on the Library of Congress website〕 The only exception to televising the Court under this legislation would be if a majority of justices decided that "allowing such coverage in a particular case would violate the due process rights of any of the parties involved."〔( S.446 ) on the Library of Congress website〕 ==Support== Upon introducing his bill to require televising the Supreme Court of the United States proceedings, Arlen Specter announced, "()he Supreme Court makes pronouncements on constitutional and federal law that have direct impacts on the rights of Americans. Those rights would be substantially enhanced by televising the oral arguments of the Court so that the public can see and hear the issues presented." 〔("Specter Introduces Resolution to Televise Supreme Court Proceedings" ) press release (November 5, 2009)〕 Supporters of Specter's proposal reason that other government proceedings are already televised, including sessions of both the House of Representative and the Senate, covered most frequently by C-SPAN.〔Fairleigh Dickinson University's PublicMind Poll ("Public Says Televising Court Is Good for Democracy" ) press release (March 9, 2010)〕 By televising the Court, they argue that Americans would have more access to the most important institution in the U.S. judiciary, which would result in a more open and transparent government.〔 Bruce Peabody of Fairleigh Dickinson University contends that televising the Supreme Court of the United States proceedings can change the way Americans view public policy by bringing greater attention to the Court.〔Peabody, Bruce ("Legislating Supreme Court TV" ) ''Christian Science Monitor'' (September 28, 2006)〕 A 2010 New York Times editorial states that public access to the court would give Americans the opportunity to get a closer look at how a powerful branch of government operates. It adds that the televising the Court would hold presidents accountable for the justices they nominate. The editorial reasons, "()ight now, we see the justices during their confirmation hearings and rarely after that."〔(Your Reality TV ) ''New York Times'' editorial (March 13, 2010)〕 During her confirmation hearing in 2009, Justice Sonia Sotomayor indicated that she is open to the idea of televising court proceedings, stating, "I have had positive experiences with cameras. When I have been asked to join experiments of using cameras in the courtroom, I have participated. I have volunteered." 〔(Cameras in the Court ) on the C-SPAN website〕 U.S. Senators who co-sponsored Spector's resolution,〔( S.RES.339 ) on the Library of Congress website〕 and who are therefore on record as favoring the televising of Supreme Court proceedings include: *Sen. Arlen Specter, D-PA〔 *Sen. John Cornyn, R-TX *Sen. Russell Feingold, D-WI *Sen. Ted Kaufman, D-DE *Sen. Charles Schumer, D-NY *Sen. Richard Durbin, D-IL *Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-NY *Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-MN *Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-RI 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Supreme Court of the United States, televised」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|