01.11
Over at the Volokh Conspiracy Orin Kerr Posts : Supreme Court Temporarily Blocks YouTube Broadcast of Same-Sex Marriage Trial
From the Associated Press:
The Supreme Court is blocking a broadcast of the trial on California’s same-sex marriage ban, at least for the first few days. . . . The high court on Monday said it will not allow video of the trial to be posted on YouTube.com, even with a delay, until the justices have more time to consider the issue. It said that Monday’s order will be in place at least until Wednesday
This seems to me exactly the kind of news/speech that should be protected by the first amendment. Whatever your view on the outcome we all should be able to see the arguments made that determine, or at least influence, how the court rules. Some will say: “You can read about it later.” I say: “Why not now?”
Update: I see again at Volokh there is live blogging of the sesession. That is good but still not the same as an audio or visual real time feed.
The problem with YouTube broadcasts of the same sex marriage trial, is that the Judge is biased in favor of same sex marriage. It’s long been understood that justice requires that the identities of victims, witnesses and jurors, be withheld from defendents who might be inclined to murder them, first amendment rights not withstanding. Gay rights activists have allready demonstrated a proclivity to harass and attack those who have supported the same sex marriage ban. The reason judge Walker wants to allow YouTube broadcasts from his courtroom, is to enable acts of witness intimidation.
I get your point Outlaw but — If the defendant in a trial is guilty and likely to react as you say he ought be convicted and put away. Now that means his friends might take up his case and that would be a problem. I just think the more things stay open the better track we can keep on those who would take away our rights or change the definition of rights and that is for the best.
I also think this is the kind of thing that should be ruled upon by a local judge knowing the circumstances. The local guy might get it wrong but he might be voted out of office. This does not apply to Federal Judges and therein lies another problem.