Gerry Connolly Introduces Legislation Allowing Cameras at Supreme Court

There have been several times over the last few years where I wanted to attend oral arguments at the Supreme Court. Despite arriving extremely early, however, I haven’t actually been able to get in because they only allow about 50 people in to watch. This is noteworthy because even though I live in the DC area and was able to move around meetings in order to make my way to the Court, I still wasn’t able to get in. What makes it worse is that because I wasn’t one of the lucky few to get in, I joined the millions of Americans who had no way of watching the proceedings because SCOTUS doesn’t allow cameras in the Court.

The ban on cameras means that the court impacts many key issues in American life without a true way for the American public to see how it operates. As Rep. Gerry Connolly put it in a tweet he recently sent out, this is “unconscionable” and “anti-democratic” and should be changed as the Court will be hearing crucial cases on issues like health care reform.

While I’m glad to see that Gerry’s publicly addressing the needs for cameras in the courtroom, he’s going well beyond simply sending out tweets. He’s also introduced legislation in the House -- the Cameras in the Courtroom Act of 2011 (H.R. 3572) – that would permit television coverage of all open sessions of the U.S. Supreme Court unless a majority of justices decided that allowing coverage of a particular case would violate the due process rights of a party appearing before the court.

“Currently, cameras are barred from the Supreme Court, and the court allocates only 50 seats to view open proceedings,” Connolly said. “This limited seating suggests an elitism and propensity of secrecy unworthy of the third branch of our government. Cameras in the courtroom would bring a higher degree of transparency and accountability to the high court, and would give the public better access to deliberations on the important issues that come before the court.”

Connolly added, “We live in a time where information transfer from across the globe is near instantaneous, where a hand-held cell phone can provide world-wide video conferencing, yet access to momentous deliberations in the Supreme Court on cases like Bush v. Gore, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, Kelo v. City of New London, and the upcoming debate on the health insurance reform law is limited to a few dozen citizens.”

The bill has been referred to the House Judiciary Committee and Gerry’s still trying to get more cosponsors, but it’s noteworthy that it’s already gained bipartisan support. A former judge and Texan Republican, Ted Poe, has already signed on and Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) has actually introduced a companion bill (S.1945) in the Senate with Dick Durbin.

Since Congress doesn’t come back from its winter recess until the end of the month, the House Judiciary Committee is currently focused on the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), and Gerry fully admits he’s still looking for more cosponors, I don’t see this bill passing for quite some time. That being said, it sure is nice to see that we have some Members of Congress standing up for transparency in government.