[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 160 (Thursday, November 13, 1997)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E2369-E2370]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                H.R. 1280: SUNSHINE IN THE COURTROOM ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. STEVE CHABOT

                                of ohio

                    in the house of representatives

                      Thursday, November 13, 1997

  Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Speaker, I would first like to thank all of my 
colleagues for their continued support of the effort to bring sunshine 
into our courts. Because of this dedicated bipartisan effort to bring 
cameras into our Nation's Federal courtrooms, this issue has become 
very familiar to legislators, attorneys, the media and the public. 
Again, I thank my colleagues for their efforts.
  I would like to emphasize to the American people and to members of 
Congress the importance of passing H.R. 1280, the Sunshine in the 
Courtroom Act. This Act, which Congressman Schumer and I introduced in 
April, allows for the photographing, electronic recording, 
broadcasting, and televising of Federal court proceedings at the 
discretion of the presiding judge. Its passage in the next session of 
this Congress would protect the right of every U.S. citizen to see 
their judicial system at work and ensure the accountability of our 
Federal judges.
  Proceedings on the floor of the House of Representatives, as well as 
the Senate, are open to all citizens through C-Span, and the local and 
national television news, allowing the American people to stay 
appraised of the actions of the legislative branch of the Government. 
Why then, should the judicial branch be any different? Members of the 
Congress are elected every 2 to 6 years, Federal judges are appointed 
for life. Lifetime tenure for unelected officials confers a tremendous 
amount of power. The American people deserve to see for themselves what 
is happening in Federal courtrooms. I don't think anyone should be 
denied that right.
  One of the many clear benefits that cameras will bring to our Federal 
courts is a more open system, which will generate more faith in our 
judicial system. Chief Justice Berger once wrote, ``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.'' 
In many ways, the Federal courts were intended to be, and are,

[[Page E2370]]

the most majestic and deliberative institutions of our Government. Why 
should our constituents not be allowed access to those institutions?
  Look across the street any day that the Supreme Court is in session. 
Hundreds, sometimes thousands, of Americans amass hoping to be lucky 
enough to gain admittance to an argument before our Nation's highest 
court. Some are tourists, visiting the Nation's capital. Some are 
students on a school trip. All will see the impressive building that 
houses the Court, but most will not see the actual proceedings that 
occur inside.
  Why should the American people be kept in the dark? Why should they 
be forced to rely on the news media to interpret and filter the 
proceedings when, if cameras were allowed, they could watch it for 
themselves? As Judge Robert Bork has written, ``There is often great 
value in the public seeing the reality of the legal system or of a 
particular case rather than being left with unchallenged myth and media 
distortions. The courts are a public institution * * *''. The public 
needs to know that our judicial system is strong, stable and 
trustworthy.
  Another benefit of cameras is the effect that they will have on 
curbing judicial activism. Federal judges are appointed to interpret 
the laws set forth by the Constitution of the United States. 
Unfortunately, there seems to be a disturbing trend in the judicial 
system. Some judges have reached far beyond their Constitutional 
authority in recent years and begun to make their own laws. They seem 
to thrive on twisting the laws passed by Congress, and the 
Constitution, ignoring its plain meaning and in some cases 
extrapolating new doctrines. We need to hold judges accountable for 
their actions and decisions in our courtrooms. One of the best ways to 
do this is to keep the judicial system under the scrutiny of the public 
eye. We, all of us, as citizens and particularly as lawmakers have the 
absolute responsibility to ensure that the balance of powers is being 
respected by the third branch just as they scrutinize Congress and the 
executive branch.
  From civil rights to religious rights to property rights, to domestic 
tranquillity, the decisions of our Federal courts impact our 
constituents, shaping their lives and their liberties. Out constituents 
are able to watch C-SPAN to observe how these laws are formulated; they 
should be able to see how they are interpreted, as well.

  I would also like to address a concern of open courtroom opponents by 
entering into the Record an excerpt of a letter I recently received 
from Fred Goldman, father of murder victim Ron Goldman. ``The courts 
belong to the people and the public must have the right to see the 
process for themselves. Sometimes the system works and sometimes it 
does not. In either case, the public should have the ability to see for 
itself. Camera opponents love to argue that the camera's presence in 
the criminal trial of Ron's killer was somehow to blame for his 
acquittal. I know this is a popular argument, so I want to state 
clearly and for the record that I think this is wrong. We sat in the 
courtroom throughout the trial and we know the camera was not to 
blame.''
  Fred Goldman has endorsed the Sunshine in the Courtroom Act and I 
want to thank him for his support.
  It also is important to remember that H.R. 1280 does not force 
Federal judges to admit cameras in every Federal court case regardless 
of circumstance. Instead, this legislation grants the presiding judge 
the power to decide in each specific case whether he or she will allow 
cameras in the courtroom. This allows judges to protect those who need 
the privacy of a closed courtroom, such as children, victims of sexual 
assault, and other sensitive cases in which the identity of those 
involved in the trial need to remain confidential or where there is 
reasonable concern or disruption.
  Finally, Mr. Speaker, 48 States have found that cameras work in their 
courtrooms. In my own State of Ohio, for example, Chief Justice Moyer 
has been at the forefront of pushing for camera access. In his words, 
``* * * our opportunities to educate the public about the nature of our 
work are greatly enhanced by television. Given the technological 
advances of video equipment and satellite communications, we now have 
the emergence of Court TV * * * we long ago established the principle 
of open courtrooms with trials in full public view. Cameras are simply 
the logical progression of the tradition. If we are truly sincere about 
our efforts and desire to make the public more aware about the work and 
role of our courts, cameras must be a part of the process.''
  Mr. Speaker, this Congress must commit itself to passing H.R. 1280 
into law next session. Parts of this important legislation have already 
moved through Subcommittee, and I will be working hard to ensure that 
the bill continues to move forward, either as part of other legislation 
or as a stand alone bill. I continue to believe, along with many of my 
distinguished colleagues from both sides of the aisle, that cameras in 
Federal courts is key to the judicial branch being accountable and 
accessible to the American public.
  The Sunshine in the Courtroom Act works to keep the American people 
informed about their Government, a government supported with their tax 
dollars. It is time to bring sunshine into our Federal courts. We have 
waited long enough.

                          ____________________