When the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit announced a while back that it was going to allow video cameras into federal courtrooms for civil trials, I thought: "About time. Let people watch the wheels of justice turn without having to go down to the courthouse, which they'll never do."
Well, surprise! Even with the cameras, you'll have to go down to the courthouse to watch. They just announced that the big federal trial of California's same-sex marriage case, which starts tomorrow, is going to be televised, but get this: The live feed will be only to a handful of other federal courthouses on the West Coast (and one in Brooklyn, New York). Here in Oregon, if you want to watch the trial, you'll have to head to the Pioneer Courthouse to watch the big screen in the courtroom there (if there's enough room for the number of spectators who show up).
With all due respect, that's pretty silly. First of all, we just spent mega-millions turning that courthouse into an armed fortress so that your average Joes and Janes will stay out of it. Now we're going to make it the TV viewing station? Will people on both sides of the case be allowed to stand up, cheer, and throw rolls of toilet paper when something good happens for their side -- or will regular courtroom decorum be required? (And if the latter, who will enforce it?) The scene at the Pioneer Courthouse might actually be more interesting than the trial itself. Perhaps we could put cameras in that courtroom, too.
But all kidding aside, confining the viewing stations to federal courthouses eviscerates the public accessibility aspect of this experiment, which I thought was the whole point. Sheesh, Ninth Circuit, could you spare it?
Comments (16)
The Courthouse is very accessible. About a month ago, I got a parking ticket outside while paying a speeding ticket inside.
First of all the 9th circuit is not known for having a lot of common sense, and they seldom agree with decisions of the other federal appellate courts in the U.S. Being headquartered in San Fransico speaks volumes about what to expect.
But off kilter as they often seem to be, there still exists this built in "government instinct" to protect that which is theirs, often times by keeping the process a mystery. By doing so it minimizes criticism following any decision, good or bad. We often holler for transparency in government, but somehow forget to include the judicial branch in the rant.
What is happening to this country?
Is there anything left for the citizens of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA or are we going to be left out of every single official government process?
And taking this analysis a fit further, will they prevent attendees from bringing in video recording devices? It would seem that if they want to control public accessibility that badly, they'll have to do that as well.
I'm sure you won't be entering the Pioneer Courthouse without passing through heavy security, most likely operated by the U.S. Marshals or the Federal Protective Service.
If they say no cameras, then so be it -- although nowadays just about every cell phone is a camera. They'll probably throw you out if your cell phone rings, or if you pull it out and try to use the camera function. We'll see.
I thought I remember reading that it would only be viewable live in the other courthouses, but that they would post it on YouTube a day or two later. Have they reversed that decision?
Speaking of Pioneer Courthouse, does anyone know why it is still scaffolded on one side? I don't think I've ever seen that building completely without scaffolding since the big renovation started in 2002 or 2003. Is it in continual danger of falling down or what?
I guess even the live feeds got zapped, at least for now:
It was also to have been the first federal trial in California telecast to the public, in a delayed Internet posting on YouTube. But an hour before the trial started, the Supreme Court blocked the uploads, along with live simulcasts in several federal courthouses, at the request of Prop. 8 defenders who argued that camera coverage would subject witnesses to harassment and intimidation.
I guess we come back Wednesday to see what the final decision is.
The scaffolding on the Pioneer Courthouse has to do with repairing the stonework. The scaffolding began on the front and has moved around to the other sides. Not really related to the base-isolation project which resulted in the long closure of the Courthouse several years ago.
Charamba, Douro 2008
Horse Heaven Hills, Cabernet 2010
Lorelle, Horse Heaven Hills Pinot Grigio 2011
Avignonesi, Montepulciano 2004
Lorelle, Willamette Valley Pinot Noir 2011
Villa Antinori, Toscana 2007
Mercedes Eguren, Cabernet Sauvignon 2009
Lorelle, Columbia Valley Cabernet 2011
Purple Moon, Merlot 2011
Purple Moon, Chardonnnay 2011
Abacela, Vintner's Blend No. 12
Opula Red Blend 2010
Liberte, Pinot Noir 2010
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Indian Wells Red Blend 2010
Woodbridge, Chardonnay 2011
King Estate, Pinot Noir 2011
Famille Perrin, Cotes du Rhone Villages 2010
Columbia Crest, Les Chevaux Red 2010
14 Hands, Hot to Trot White Blend
Familia Bianchi, Malbec 2009
Terrapin Cellars, Pinot Gris 2011
Columbia Crest, Walter Clore Private Reserve 2009
Campo Viejo, Rioja, Termpranillo 2010
Ravenswood, Cabernet Sauvignon 2009
Quinta das Amoras, Vinho Tinto 2010
Waterbrook, Reserve Merlot 2009
Lorelle, Horse Heaven Hills, Pinot Grigio 2011
Tarantas, Rose
Chateau Lajarre, Bordeaux 2009
La Vielle Ferme, Rose 2011
Benvolio, Pinot Grigio 2011
Nobilo Icon, Pinot Noir 2009
Lello, Douro Tinto 2009
Quinson Fils, Cotes de Provence Rose 2011
Anindor, Pinot Gris 2010
Buenas Ondas, Syrah Rose 2010
Les Fiefs d'Anglars, Malbec 2009
14 Hands, Pinot Gris 2011
Conundrum 2012
Condes de Albarei, Albariño 2011
Columbia Crest, Walter Clore Private Reserve 2007
Penelope Sanchez, Garnacha Syrah 2010
Canoe Ridge, Merlot 2007
Atalaya do Mar, Godello 2010
Vega Montan, Mencia
Benvolio, Pinot Grigio
Nobilo Icon, Pinot Noir, Marlborough 2009
Portuga, Rose 2011
Revelation, Chardonnay, Pays d'Oc 2010
Beaulieu, Cabernet, Rutherford 2005
Monte Alto, Tinto Reserva 2005
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Cabernet, Indian Wells 2009
Espiral, Vinho Rose
Vin-Koru, Pinot Gris 2011
14 Hands, Hot to Trot Red 2009
Rodney Strong, Cabernet, Sonoma 2009
Abacela, Vintner's Blend #11
Portuga, White 2010
La Bourgeoisie, Red 2009
Januik, Red 2009
Three Rivers, River's Red 2008
Kirkland, Alexander Valley Merlot 2008
Muga, Rioja Rose 2010
Quinta das Amoras, Vinho Tinto 2009
Mauro Molino, Barbera d'Alba 2009
Garda Chiaretto Rose
Columbia Crest, Two Vines Vineyard 10 White
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Pinot Gris, Columbia Valley 2009
L'Hortus, Rose de Saignee 2010
Maculan, Pino & Toi 2008
McKinley Springs, Bombing Range Red 2008
Trader Joe's Pinot Gris 2009
Montes Alpha, Cabernet 2007
Gran Sasso, Sangiovese, Terre di Chieti 2009
Garda, Classico Chiaretto Rose
Beaulieu, Cabernet, Rutherford 1999
Picos del Montgo, Tempranillo 2008
Chateau de Montmirail, Vacqueyras 2008
La Granja 360, Syrah 2009
Montgras, Carmenere Reserva 2009
Lange, Pinot Gris 2009
Columbia Crest, Horse Heaven Hills Cabernet 2008
Kirkland, Pinot Grigio 2010
Trader Joe's Coastal Syrah 2009
Columbia Crest, Horse Heaven Hills Merlot 2008
Trader Joe's Coastal Chardonnay 2009
Vieux Papes Red
Domaine de l'Aujardiere, Chardonnay 2009
Santa Rita, Cabernet, Medalla Real 2007
Penfold's, Koonunga Hill Shiraz Cabernet 2008
Guild, Red, Lot #02 2008
Dievole, Dievolino Sangiovese 2008
Laforet, Burgogne Chardonnay 2009
Columbia Winery, Merlot 2007
Bonterra, Cabernet 2008
Elk Cove, Pinot Gris 2009
Maquis Lien 2006
Scott Paul, Pinot Noir, Le Paulee 2007
The Occasional Book
Neil Young - Waging Heavy Peace
Mark Bego - Aretha Franklin, the Queen of Soul (2012 ed.)
Jenny Lawson - Let's Pretend This Never Happened
J.D. Salinger - Franny and Zooey
Charles Dickens - A Christmas Carol
Timothy Egan - The Big Burn
Deborah Eisenberg - Transactions in a Foreign Currency
Kurt Vonnegut Jr. - Slaughterhouse Five
Kathryn Lance - Pandora's Genes
Cheryl Strayed - Wild
Fyodor Dostoyevsky - The Brothers Karamazov
Jack London - The House of Pride, and Other Tales of Hawaii
Jack Walker - The Extraordinary Rendition of Vincent Dellamaria
Colum McCann - Let the Great World Spin
Niccolò Machiavelli - The Prince
Harper Lee - To Kill a Mockingbird
Emma McLaughlin & Nicola Kraus - The Nanny Diaries
Brian Selznick - The Invention of Hugo Cabret
Sharon Creech - Walk Two Moons
Keith Richards - Life
F. Sionil Jose - Dusk
Natalie Babbitt - Tuck Everlasting
Justin Halpern - S#*t My Dad Says
Mark Herrmann - The Curmudgeon's Guide to Practicing Law
Barry Glassner - The Gospel of Food
Phil Stanford - The Peyton-Allan Files
Jesse Katz - The Opposite Field
Evelyn Waugh - Brideshead Revisited
J.K. Rowling - Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone
David Sedaris - Holidays on Ice
Donald Miller - A Million Miles in a Thousand Years
Mitch Albom - Have a Little Faith
C.S. Lewis - The Magician's Nephew
F. Scott Fitzgerald - The Great Gatsby
William Shakespeare - A Midsummer Night's Dream
Ivan Doig - Bucking the Sun
Penda Diakité - I Lost My Tooth in Africa
Grace Lin - The Year of the Rat
Oscar Hijuelos - Mr. Ives' Christmas
Madeline L'Engle - A Wrinkle in Time
Steven Hart - The Last Three Miles
David Sedaris - Me Talk Pretty One Day
Karen Armstrong - The Spiral Staircase
Charles Larson - The Portland Murders
Adrian Wojnarowski - The Miracle of St. Anthony
William H. Colby - Long Goodbye
Steven D. Stark - Meet the Beatles
Phil Stanford - Portland Confidential
Rick Moody - Garden State
Jonathan Schwartz - All in Good Time
David Sedaris - Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim
Anthony Holden - Big Deal
Robert J. Spitzer - The Spirit of Leadership
James McManus - Positively Fifth Street
Jeff Noon - Vurt
Road Work
Miles run year to date: 21
At this date last year: 52
Total run in 2012: 129
In 2011: 113
In 2010: 125
In 2009: 67
In 2008: 28
In 2007: 113
In 2006: 100
In 2005: 149
In 2004: 204
In 2003: 269
Comments (16)
The Courthouse is very accessible. About a month ago, I got a parking ticket outside while paying a speeding ticket inside.
Posted by Brian | January 10, 2010 7:10 AM
Wrong courthouse, Brian.
Posted by Fran | January 10, 2010 8:06 AM
First of all the 9th circuit is not known for having a lot of common sense, and they seldom agree with decisions of the other federal appellate courts in the U.S. Being headquartered in San Fransico speaks volumes about what to expect.
But off kilter as they often seem to be, there still exists this built in "government instinct" to protect that which is theirs, often times by keeping the process a mystery. By doing so it minimizes criticism following any decision, good or bad. We often holler for transparency in government, but somehow forget to include the judicial branch in the rant.
Posted by Gibby | January 10, 2010 9:03 AM
9th court of appeals was fine until republicans were appointed.
As with all political agencies transparency is something no party or agency wishes.
Posted by KISS | January 10, 2010 10:14 AM
What is happening to this country?
Is there anything left for the citizens of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA or are we going to be left out of every single official government process?
Posted by al m | January 10, 2010 12:00 PM
Jack,
Will the court feed the signal to your law school or to a group of law schools?
Posted by Joel | January 10, 2010 12:09 PM
Not so far.
Posted by Jack Bog | January 10, 2010 2:09 PM
And taking this analysis a fit further, will they prevent attendees from bringing in video recording devices? It would seem that if they want to control public accessibility that badly, they'll have to do that as well.
Posted by john rettig | January 10, 2010 11:21 PM
Thats what I was thinking John... I wonder who will try to challenge that? Maybe a good journalist or blogger?
Posted by curious | January 11, 2010 12:31 AM
I'm sure you won't be entering the Pioneer Courthouse without passing through heavy security, most likely operated by the U.S. Marshals or the Federal Protective Service.
If they say no cameras, then so be it -- although nowadays just about every cell phone is a camera. They'll probably throw you out if your cell phone rings, or if you pull it out and try to use the camera function. We'll see.
Posted by Jack Bog | January 11, 2010 12:37 AM
The news release clearly says, "No photographs or recording of the audio and video displayed at the remote viewing locations will be allowed".
Posted by John | January 11, 2010 8:16 AM
SCOTUS, led by Roberts, has very recently ruled:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100111/ap_on_go_su_co/us_gay_marriage_trial
Change often takes more time than anticipated.
Posted by Gardiner Menefree | January 11, 2010 10:26 AM
I thought I remember reading that it would only be viewable live in the other courthouses, but that they would post it on YouTube a day or two later. Have they reversed that decision?
Posted by Michael | January 11, 2010 1:00 PM
Speaking of Pioneer Courthouse, does anyone know why it is still scaffolded on one side? I don't think I've ever seen that building completely without scaffolding since the big renovation started in 2002 or 2003. Is it in continual danger of falling down or what?
Posted by MarciaFS | January 11, 2010 1:24 PM
I guess even the live feeds got zapped, at least for now:
It was also to have been the first federal trial in California telecast to the public, in a delayed Internet posting on YouTube. But an hour before the trial started, the Supreme Court blocked the uploads, along with live simulcasts in several federal courthouses, at the request of Prop. 8 defenders who argued that camera coverage would subject witnesses to harassment and intimidation.
I guess we come back Wednesday to see what the final decision is.
Posted by Michael | January 11, 2010 3:30 PM
The scaffolding on the Pioneer Courthouse has to do with repairing the stonework. The scaffolding began on the front and has moved around to the other sides. Not really related to the base-isolation project which resulted in the long closure of the Courthouse several years ago.
Posted by Repairman | January 11, 2010 8:26 PM