In a day when even our cellphones can capture images unobtrusively, why were we forced to stare at pixels on our computer screens or at a static televised image of the Supreme Court’s exterior? In 2012, why is there a wall of separation between the American people and their high court? For decades, the debate over cameras in the court has gone something like this: the press pleads for permission and the court says no; academics make policy arguments that the court ignores; and Congress threatens to force cameras into the court, but the justices don’t blink. The argument remains deadlocked, with the justices insisting that they will not risk the integrity of the court until they can be certain of the effects and camera proponents arguing tha...
At the turn of the twentieth century, the owners of newspapers quickly understood the significance o...
On June 30, 1997, the State of New York became one of the nation\u27s few states which does not perm...
The United States Supreme Court has held that the public has a constitutional right of access to cri...
In a day when even our cellphones can capture images unobtrusively, why were we forced to stare at p...
Associate Professor Sonja West shares two rarely published photos of the U.S. Supreme Court in sessi...
Wednesday, October 3, 2012 Associate Professor Sonja R. West has published Smile for the Camera: Th...
It is well known that Supreme Court Justices are not fans of cameras — specifically, video cameras. ...
In spite of a communications revolution that has given the public access to new media in new places,...
From the introduction: News media, legal blogs, and law reviews routinely cite a panoply of reasons ...
Since the advent of film and video recording, society has enjoyed the ability to capture the lights ...
Though the Supreme Court allows public attendance and print media coverage of argument sessions, Sup...
With the latest appointment to the United States Supreme Court, five of the nine justices have indic...
In several recent court cases, television viewers throughout the nation were able to see excerpts of...
Cameras are an understandable yet inapt target for Supreme Court Justices apprehensive about televis...
Article published in the Michigan State University School of Law Student Scholarship Collection
At the turn of the twentieth century, the owners of newspapers quickly understood the significance o...
On June 30, 1997, the State of New York became one of the nation\u27s few states which does not perm...
The United States Supreme Court has held that the public has a constitutional right of access to cri...
In a day when even our cellphones can capture images unobtrusively, why were we forced to stare at p...
Associate Professor Sonja West shares two rarely published photos of the U.S. Supreme Court in sessi...
Wednesday, October 3, 2012 Associate Professor Sonja R. West has published Smile for the Camera: Th...
It is well known that Supreme Court Justices are not fans of cameras — specifically, video cameras. ...
In spite of a communications revolution that has given the public access to new media in new places,...
From the introduction: News media, legal blogs, and law reviews routinely cite a panoply of reasons ...
Since the advent of film and video recording, society has enjoyed the ability to capture the lights ...
Though the Supreme Court allows public attendance and print media coverage of argument sessions, Sup...
With the latest appointment to the United States Supreme Court, five of the nine justices have indic...
In several recent court cases, television viewers throughout the nation were able to see excerpts of...
Cameras are an understandable yet inapt target for Supreme Court Justices apprehensive about televis...
Article published in the Michigan State University School of Law Student Scholarship Collection
At the turn of the twentieth century, the owners of newspapers quickly understood the significance o...
On June 30, 1997, the State of New York became one of the nation\u27s few states which does not perm...
The United States Supreme Court has held that the public has a constitutional right of access to cri...