Busy, busy day at the Prop 8 trial today in San Francisco. We tweeted the entire proceeding in real time and got an overwhelming response; check out fedcourtjunkie tomorrow for more from inside the courtroom.(And see the wrapup on Monday's hearing at CalLaw).
When we got back to our desk, we picked up a little letter war between Ninth Circuit Chief Judge Alex Kozinski and the U.S. Judicial Conference in Washington, D.C. The folks back East asked Kozinski to “consider” conference policy against cameras in the court. Kozinski, who has a turbulent history with Conference oversight (Internet firewalls, anyone?), fired back a missive defending the Ninth Circuit’s power to broadcast. Kozinski also said the circuit has been moving cautiously.
“Like it or not, we are now well into the Twenty-First Century,” Kozinski wrote, “and it is up to those of us who lead the federal judiciary to adopt policies that are consistent with the spirit of the times and the advantages afforded us by new technology. If we do not, Congress will do it for us.”
— Dan Levine
Follow me on Twitter
To me, this debate over youtube availability is nuts. You and others are reporting from the courtroom; the proceedings are therefore public. The question then becomes whether we should allow the public to see and weigh the issues itself, or be dependent on a third-party filter. OF COURSE people can distort, or mash up the videos. But that's also true of books, where quotes are taken selectively and out of context.
Bottom line: If the trial is open, it should be open in the fullest sense. If there's a real concern about witness intimidation, harassment, etc., then close the proceedings. I've weighed in on my blog: http://wordinedgewise.org/?p=677
Posted by: John Culhane | January 12, 2010 at 05:31 PM