WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court does not allow cameras at its proceedings and only rarely authorizes the immediate release of audio recordings of its argument sessions.
But if any justices happened to have their office TVs tuned to C-SPAN on Tuesday, they would have seen something unusual, if not instructive.
The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York allowed live television coverage of arguments in the case of a Canadian engineer who wants to sue the United States for mistaking him for a terrorist and sending him to Syria, where he claims he was tortured.
The arguments lasted nearly three hours in a packed courtroom, and C-SPAN viewers saw lawyers and judges at the top of their games, seemingly oblivious to the cameras and engaged in lively questions and answers in a case of wide interest.
But if any justices happened to have their office TVs tuned to C-SPAN on Tuesday, they would have seen something unusual, if not instructive.
The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York allowed live television coverage of arguments in the case of a Canadian engineer who wants to sue the United States for mistaking him for a terrorist and sending him to Syria, where he claims he was tortured.
The arguments lasted nearly three hours in a packed courtroom, and C-SPAN viewers saw lawyers and judges at the top of their games, seemingly oblivious to the cameras and engaged in lively questions and answers in a case of wide interest.
"It was certainly an argument worthy of broadcast," said Catherine O'Hagan Wolfe, the Clerk of the 2nd Circuit.
The justices have given several reasons for their opposition to televising their sessions. Some have worried that the presence of cameras would lead some lawyers or even justices to ham it up. Others have said it would change the way justices relate to each other or be a distraction. Justice Antonin Scalia has said he fears video would be used to air misleading or out-of-context snippets of arguments.
READ: MSN - Associated Press
