On April 23, C-SPAN sent the U.S. Supreme Court a letter asking permission to televise the May 15 oral arguments concerning issues related to President Trump's birthright citizenship executive order. The Court apparently has not responded, but it has consistently rebuffed requests to televise proceedings, and there is no reason to think C-SPAN's latest effort will meet with a different result.
I do not believe televising Supreme Court oral arguments would be good for the Court, or for the country. But many disagree, and Congress has repeatedly introduced legislation to mandate cameras in the nation's highest court. Currently percolating in the House and Senate are versions of the Cameras in the Courtroom Act, which would instruct the Supreme Court to permit television coverage of open sessions, unless a majority of the Court decides that doing so would violate due process.
I maintain the view I expressed years ago, in an article written for the University of Pennsylvania Law Review, that Congress lacks the power under the U.S. Constitution to force the Court to televise oral arguments, and that attempting to do so would unjustifiably impinge on the independence and authority of a coequal branch of government.
Read the full article: Congress's Power to Compel The Televising of Supreme Court Proceedings
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
