USA, May 27, (Pal Telegraph) - Supreme Court Justice David Souter revealed last week that when he retires to New Hampshire this summer, he'll serve on a committee that is revamping that state's public school civics curriculum. Lamenting the demise of civics education, Souter said our republic "is lost if it is not understood." He cited surveys showing that two-thirds of Americans can't even name the three branches of government.
Souter is performing a great service by spotlighting this crisis in his final days on the Supreme Court. But with all due respect, it can also be said that Souter will help solve the problem by his very act of leaving. Why? Because Souter's departure could speed the day when the Supreme Court allows cameras to broadcast its proceedings - a surefire, almost no-brainer way of increasing awareness of the judicial branch of government
It is Souter, you might recall, who said in 1996 that the day cameras are allowed in the Supreme Court, they would "roll over my dead body." Chief Justice John Roberts, when publicly asked about cameras in the court, sometimes repeats Souter's "dead body" comment and says, "We all like Justice Souter." With Souter gone, that obstacle will be removed - thankfully, with no fatalities involved.
Resistance to change
That does not mean that the Supreme Court will suddenly embrace cameras and welcome them into the Marble Palace. Clinging quaintly to their traditions, most justices fear a change that might affect their deliberations and personal safety, or might dirty their hands by lumping them in with the more political, media-saturated branches.
Well, it's getting to be too late for such antique qualms. The Internet Age demands transparency from all institutions all the time. Any government body that lags behind is in danger of losing legitimacy, relevance and, at the very least, public awareness.
Congress is also trying to send this message to the nation's highest court. Legislation requiring camera access has gotten closer and closer to passage. At a recent House hearing,
Rep. Jose Serrano, D-N.Y., told Justices Clarence Thomas and Stephen Breyer that "the train has left the station" and that the court should allow cameras in. Rep. John Culberson, R-Texas, underscored the point by whipping out his smartphone and training it on the justices. Within seconds, the two jurists were on the Internet smiling uncertainly for the camera.
A lesson from confirmation
The Senate's forthcoming confirmation hearings on Judge Sonia Sotomayor, nominated Tuesday by President Obama to succeed Souter, will also be a teachable moment at the intersection of all three branches of government. Televised hearings are not always pretty, but they put our constitutional structure on display for all to see, and to learn. The court on which Sotomayor currently sits, by the way, has allowed camera access for years in most circumstances.
It does not take a battery of surveys to realize that the public will learn and understand more about the Supreme Court - and government in general - if its proceedings are on view nationwide. In fact, the court needs look no further than one of its own precedents to reach this conclusion. In a 1980 case affirming the openness of courtroom trials, the court said: "People in an open society do not demand infallibility from their institutions, but it is difficult for them to accept what they are prohibited from observing."
With Souter heading to New Hampshire, it is finally time for the court to apply those words to itself.
By Tony Mauro, Supreme Court correspondent for National Law Journal and Incisive Media, is a member of USA TODAY's board of contributors.
USA TODAY
Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites
To create link towards this article on your website,
copy and paste the text below in your page.
Preview :
