[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 157 (2011), Part 13]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 19051-19052]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                THE CAMERAS IN THE COURTROOM ACT OF 2011

                                 ______
                                 

                        HON. GERALD E. CONNOLLY

                              of virginia

                    in the house of representatives

                       Tuesday, December 6, 2011

  Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, today I introduced the Cameras 
in the Court Act of 2011 to ensure transparency and accountability in 
the judicial branch by providing television coverage for open 
proceedings before the United States Supreme Court.
  This is companion legislation to a bipartisan bill, S. 1945, 
introduced yesterday by Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL), Assistant Senate 
Majority Leader, and Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Ranking Member on 
the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. The Cameras in the Courtroom Act 
of 2011 respects the individual rights of the parties appearing before 
the Court, only applying to open proceedings. In addition, a majority 
of the Supreme Court justices may vote to exclude television coverage 
of a particular proceeding if they decide that such coverage would 
result in a violation of the due process rights of any of the specific 
parties before the Court.
  This legislation would only apply to those Supreme Court proceedings 
currently open to the public. Individual Americans are welcome to 
observe these Court proceedings, but only in an extremely limited 
number. The Supreme Court has seating for several hundred, however they 
typically only allocate roughly 50 seats for the general public. And 
that is what is so troubling. Given the sweeping nature of recent 
Supreme Court decisions, this limited seating almost screams elitism, 
secrecy and contempt for the public by this third branch of our 
government.
  I strongly believe that the separation of powers and our system of 
checks and balances is essential to the successful operation of a 
democratic society. However transparency and accountability are 
necessary to ensure that those checks and balances are properly 
applied, even in the judicial branch itself.
  Regardless of the scope of the legislation, Congressional debates and 
votes on each and every bill are televised and available to Americans 
through CSPAN. It was not enough for reporters to pass along their 
accounts of what occurred, nor was it enough for the limited number of 
Americans who could directly observe from the House and Senate 
galleries. The entire American public--it was determined--was entitled 
to know what the Congress was undertaking in its name.
  It strains any reasonable precept of transparency to assert that such 
momentous recent Supreme Court deliberations such as Bush v. Gore, Kelo 
v. City of New London, and Citizens United v. Federal Election 
Commission were available only to the 50 Americans who

[[Page 19052]]

were allowed and fortunate enough to be among the chosen few to wait in 
the queue for public seating.
  Americans today live in a world where information is near 
instantaneous; where with a handheld cell phone they are able to 
communicate through live video conferencing with nearly anyone in the 
world. Today's technology allows us to bring events from across the 
globe to our fingertips in real time.
  It is essential that the highest arbiter of the law of our land 
provide all Americans with the opportunity to observe United States 
Supreme Court proceedings in a manner that will enable them to form 
their own opinion through direct observation. Transparency and 
accountability are the windows through which everyday citizens may 
observe and protect democracy. Are there risks that some will play to 
the cameras? Yes, absolutely. Are those risks offset by the public's 
need, indeed right, to know? Absolutely yes. Sunshine--even in the 
Supreme Court--remains the best disinfectant against those who might 
feel that the black robe of life-tenure grants them permanent immunity 
from accountability for their words and opinions.
  I urge my colleagues to support transparency and accountability in 
the United States Supreme Court and cosponsor the Cameras in the 
Courtroom Act of 2011.

                          ____________________