Access to SCOTUS

September 28, 2009
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
The Supreme Court of the United States of America will hold its opening conferences Tuesday. In honor of the beginning of a new year on the court and Justice Sonia Sotomayor joining, C-SPAN has created “Supreme Court Week” beginning Oct. 4 to educate the public about our justices and what they do.

The week kicks off with a documentary about the court, and it will also focus on the Supreme Court’s location. Viewers will be able to see the justices “Robing Room,” private dining room, and even some of the justices’ chambers.

Throughout the week, the station will air exclusive one-on-one interviews with the current justices and retired ones. C-SPAN also has dedicated a Web site to the Supreme Court, http://supremecourt.c-span.org.

According to C-SPAN, this is the first time so many justices have granted interviews for a television production.

With all the interest in Justice Sotomayor being confirmed, C-SPAN may garner more interest in its Supreme Court week than if we didn’t have a new justice.

For the general public (and even the legal community), this will be a great way to learn about our nation’s highest court, who the justices are, and what they do. Because of the nature of their jobs, we don’t know a lot about these justices as we do politicians, celebrities, and athletes because they don’t speak to the media very often. Now the court will become a little more accessible to everyone with C-SPAN or the Internet.

A complete TV schedule is listed on the C-SPAN site, along with videos, a virtual tour of the courthouse, and historical information about the court.
ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. As one of the many consumers affected by this breach, I found my bank data had been lifted and used to buy over $200 of various merchandise in New York. I did a pretty good job of tracing the purchases to stores around a college campus just from the info on my bank statement. Hm. Mr. Hill, I would like my $200 back! It doesn't belong to the state, in my opinion. Give it back to the consumers affected. I had to freeze my credit and take out data protection, order a new debit card and wait until it arrived. I deserve something for my trouble!

  2. Don't we have bigger issues to concern ourselves with?

  3. Anyone who takes the time to study disciplinary and bar admission cases in Indiana ... much of which is, as a matter of course and by intent, off the record, would have a very difficult time drawing lines that did not take into account things which are not supposed to matter, such as affiliations, associations, associates and the like. Justice Hoosier style is a far departure than what issues in most other parts of North America. (More like Central America, in fact.) See, e.g., http://www.theindianalawyer.com/indiana-attorney-illegally-practicing-in-florida-suspended-for-18-months/PARAMS/article/42200 When while the Indiana court system end the cruel practice of killing prophets of due process and those advocating for blind justice?

  4. Wouldn't this call for an investigation of Government corruption? Chief Justice Loretta Rush, wrote that the case warranted the high court’s review because the method the Indiana Court of Appeals used to reach its decision was “a significant departure from the law.” Specifically, David wrote that the appellate panel ruled after reweighing of the evidence, which is NOT permissible at the appellate level. **But yet, they look the other way while an innocent child was taken by a loving mother who did nothing wrong"

  5. Different rules for different folks....

ADVERTISEMENT