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. Video pen? Nice work, "JW"! Let this be a lesson and a caution to all disgruntled ex-spouses (or soon-to-be ex-spouses) . . . you may think that altercation is going to get you some satisfaction . . . it will not.

  2. First comment on this thread is a fitting final comment on this thread, as that the MCBA never answered Duncan's fine question, and now even Eric Holder agrees that the MCBA was in material error as to the facts: "I don't get it" from Duncan December 1, 2014 5:10 PM "The Grand Jury met for 25 days and heard 70 hours of testimony according to this article and they made a decision that no crime occurred. On what basis does the MCBA conclude that their decision was "unjust"? What special knowledge or evidence does the MCBA have that the Grand Jury hearing this matter was unaware of? The system that we as lawyers are sworn to uphold made a decision that there was insufficient proof that officer committed a crime. How can any of us say we know better what was right than the jury that actually heard all of the the evidence in this case."

  3. wow is this a bunch of bs! i know the facts!

  4. MCBA .... time for a new release about your entire membership (or is it just the alter ego) being "saddened and disappointed" in the failure to lynch a police officer protecting himself in the line of duty. But this time against Eric Holder and the Federal Bureau of Investigation: "WASHINGTON — Justice Department lawyers will recommend that no civil rights charges be brought against the police officer who fatally shot an unarmed teenager in Ferguson, Mo., after an F.B.I. investigation found no evidence to support charges, law enforcement officials said Wednesday." http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/22/us/justice-department-ferguson-civil-rights-darren-wilson.html?ref=us&_r=0

  5. Dr wail asfour lives 3 hours from the hospital,where if he gets an emergency at least he needs three hours,while even if he is on call he should be in a location where it gives him max 10 minutes to be beside the patient,they get paid double on their on call days ,where look how they handle it,so if the death of the patient occurs on weekend and these doctors still repeat same pattern such issue should be raised,they should be closer to the patient.on other hand if all the death occured on the absence of the Dr and the nurses handle it,the nurses should get trained how to function appearntly they not that good,if the Dr lives 3 hours far from the hospital on his call days he should sleep in the hospital

ADVERTISEMENT