Ginsburg: From "good for the public" to leaving "a false impression"
All nine sitting justices have at some point in their careers expressed positive or at least neutral sentiments toward putting cameras in the Supreme Court to televise oral arguments and opinion announcements.
For whatever reason, the justices today balk at the question – or have changed their opinion outright. That includes Justice Ginsburg.
Here are her own words on cameras in the court, changing over time.
1993 confirmation hearing: “I don’t see any problem with having appellate proceedings televised. I think it would be good for the public.” July 22, 1993
2014: “What the public will see is two people with a half-hour a side having a conversation with the justices, and they come away with the idea that, well, the best debater is going to win that contest,” Justice Ginsburg said. “It would leave a false impression of the appellate process to think that the oral argument is what is decisive in the cases.” February 10, 2014, New York Times
Fix the Court believes that the justices – either of their own accord or compelled by Congress – should grant the media and the public greater access to oral arguments and opinion announcements through the live broadcast of those events.