Posted on 12/16/2011 6:31:40 AM PST by Libloather
Senators pushing for Supreme Court to televise arguments on Obama’s health care overhaul
By Associated Press, Published: December 6
WASHINGTON — Senators are once again pushing the Supreme Court to televise its courtroom proceedings, especially since justices will have an election-year argument over the constitutionality of President Barack Obama’s signature health care overhaul.
A Senate Judiciary subcommittee debated Tuesday whether Congress should or — even could — force the Supreme Court, a co-equal branch of government, to allow cameras to broadcast live during arguments.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
We didn’t get to see how the legislation was made, maybe we’ll get to see it dismantled.
So leftwing commentators can skew the proceedings?
I don’t think so.
So leftwing commentators can skew the proceedings?
I don’t think so.
This would degrade the court’s stature, turning it into an OJ trial.
Is the fix in already?
Will the decision become an Obama Poster just before election? If Obama wins, I'd say that's a reasonable guess. Just add pillars!!
The article does not mention WHO is pushing for this, aside from former Senator Arlen Specter.
I have always found it a good rule of thumb that if Arlen is for it, I’m against it.
If the Dems are pushing for this it is only to use in some campaign ads about the Eeeeeeevil Right Wing SCOTUS that is taking away health care from poor people.
After some of the Court’s decisions, can it be “degraded” any more?
I'm really not sure whether a victory at the Supreme Court would help or hurt Obama's reelection. If he wins, then the Republican candidate can easily make the entire election about Obamacare, by accurately claiming that now the ONLY way to stop Obamacare is elect a Republican in 2012. With 60%+ of voters wanting Obamacare to be struck down, this might really resonate. On the other hand, if the Supreme Court strikes down Obamacare, it essentially takes if off the table as a campaign issue for 2012 and could actually play into Obama's campaign against the "Party of No" and the "Do Nothing Congress".
Mike
“A Senate Judiciary subcommittee debated Tuesday whether Congress should or — even could — force the Supreme Court, a co-equal branch of government, to allow cameras to broadcast live during arguments.”
I guess the Supreme court will have to decide this case first.
This is nothing but grnadstanding in an attempt to politicize the whole thing in anticipation of the SCOTUS overturning the whole law.
Thay want to be able to spin and use the media to demonize the whole proceeding and use as an election tool. “Look what the evil conservative wing of the Court is doing to the poor, old and young!!!! Re-elect us so we can fix this INJUSTICE!!!”
Scumsucking gutter trash leeches!
Tell the senators to go pound salt up their a$$.
I am adamantly, vehemently opposed.
On that one fact alone.
re: “Why should the stature of the Judicial branch be any different than the stature of the Legislative and Executive branch? They are all co-equal branches!
If the Judiciary acts with dignity there stature would be enhanced, if not it will be degraded. To be viewed highly they must earn it!”
I’m not disagreeing with you per se, but I just think putting cameras in the Supreme Court is a BAD idea. I know that the Court is politicized already, but cameras would make it even worse. I don’t see where having Congress filmed now has made any difference in the stupid crap they pass everyday - all it gets us is grandstanding and grandiose political speeches in order to get “face time” on MSNBC.
The Court records are already available to any who want to see them so it’s not like their proceedings are unavailable.
Do you think it would really make a positive difference having cameras there or would it just turn it into a “reality” show?
Not being hostile, just wondering.
I can't believe some here are so afraid of government transparency.
I can watch many of my state's Supreme Court arguments on TV. It hasn't degraded the court or turned it into a circus. Those are extremely weak arguments.
I just do not see Chief Justice Roberts agreeing to the wishes of the Senate.
There are at least half a dozen syndicated judge shows on television. There is a UHF station here where that is practically their whole daytime lineup. People can go there for their black robed viewing entertainment.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.