Wednesday, February 04, 2009
Scalia 0, Undergrad 1
I am no fan of bringing television cameras into the Supreme Court. I have a mountain of evidence about the damage that cameras have done to all other aspects of American politics, and would no doubt do massive damage to the Supreme Court, should it allow them inside. But on the otherside, there is something to facing the press and their questions. It makes the person consider how his or her answers will resonate with the American public. Thus the millions that are spent keeping the PR industry in business.
To underscore this point, consider the ass Associate Justice Antonin Scalia must have made of himself when he barked at a legitimate question asked of him by, of all persons, a junior political science major at Florida Atlantic University. To set the stage, Scalia is on tour promoting a new book geared towards new trial lawyers. He gave a talk in Palm Beach that was attended by 750 people, including Sarah Jeck, the junior political science major. Here is how the South Florida Sun Sentinel described what came next:
Scalia sneered that the question was "nasty" and "impolite," and ordered that someone ask the next question. It is hard to see just what part of the question was nasty or impolitie? It seems perfectly legitimate--a spin on "eating your cake and having it too." It appears that Scalia did get around to addressing the question once he had time to process her meaning. He told the audience that he opposes cameras in the courtroom because of the "30-second takeouts," which led to this conclusion: "Why should I be a party to the miseducation of the American people?" Clearly comments without a care in the world of public perception, since we are all too dim-witted to understand in the first place.
I doubt Scalia gave this a second thought considering his actions in the past, but he should. The Congress has been increasingly pushing for greater access inside the Supreme Court, and the last thing that I think Scalia and his colleagues want is a public that actively sides the Congress.
|
To underscore this point, consider the ass Associate Justice Antonin Scalia must have made of himself when he barked at a legitimate question asked of him by, of all persons, a junior political science major at Florida Atlantic University. To set the stage, Scalia is on tour promoting a new book geared towards new trial lawyers. He gave a talk in Palm Beach that was attended by 750 people, including Sarah Jeck, the junior political science major. Here is how the South Florida Sun Sentinel described what came next:
Student Sarah Jeck stood in front of 750 people and asked Scalia why cameras are not allowed in the U.S. Supreme Court even though the court hearings are open, transcripts are available and the court's justices are open enough to go "out on book tours." Scalia was at the Kravis Center for the Performing Arts in part to do a book signing and wasn't happy at the question.
Scalia sneered that the question was "nasty" and "impolite," and ordered that someone ask the next question. It is hard to see just what part of the question was nasty or impolitie? It seems perfectly legitimate--a spin on "eating your cake and having it too." It appears that Scalia did get around to addressing the question once he had time to process her meaning. He told the audience that he opposes cameras in the courtroom because of the "30-second takeouts," which led to this conclusion: "Why should I be a party to the miseducation of the American people?" Clearly comments without a care in the world of public perception, since we are all too dim-witted to understand in the first place.
I doubt Scalia gave this a second thought considering his actions in the past, but he should. The Congress has been increasingly pushing for greater access inside the Supreme Court, and the last thing that I think Scalia and his colleagues want is a public that actively sides the Congress.
