[One other thing that sort of annoys me is that there is a section on the USSC website for opinions from chambers, which are handed down from time to time (see here), but you never see them on the website.]
As the discussion notes, current practice is for the Supreme Court to wait to the end of the week to release oral argument audio, which along with labeling the justices who ask questions and even having a website at all, only has been begun in the last few years. Before they did this, the USSC in a few cases (such as the Solomon Amendment case involving military recruiter access to campuses that got Kagan in a bit of trouble) chose a few cases for same day audio. That is, even though they didn't play it live (as C-SPAN does for congressional coverage), it is a sort of "live on tape" deal. They can, of course, do this as well for the opinion announcement (and quite possible dissent from the bench) here too. If they wished.
The justices repeatedly tell people to read their opinions to understand their stance on specific issues but the practice of providing summaries during opinion announcements suggest they are willing to do more. These tend to be a few minutes long though can be over five minutes in length; but, we are still not talking that much time. The gun case was well summarized by Justice Alito in a way the general public could understand. Other highlights would include Planned Parenthood v. Casey (twenty year anniversary) or Lawrence v. Texas, each with a dissent from the bench. Why not this too?
The Supreme Court is sometimes said to be a teacher of republican values and has in recent years done some important things to fulfill this duty, down to writing books and making public appearances to different forums. Immediate release, instead of a wait of months to it is available on a still largely unknown website, of the opinion announcement of the PPACA cases would be in this spirit. It need not be live. They can even wait until the end of the week. Instead, the public will be left with a shorthand version through the medium of the people making this request.
That's just silly.
---
* Each opinion with such comments has this disclaimer:
A long list of news organizations on Friday asked the Supreme Court to release, for broadcast, the Justices’ oral announcement of the coming decision on the constitutionality of the federal health care law.See here for details. I find it curious that the author, a dean of the Supreme Court press corps, does not note that this sort of thing is not merely available (if perhaps a better part of a year later) at the "National Archives in Washington," but at Oyez.com. For instance, McDonald v. Chicago -- the state Second Amendment case -- is found here. This includes the opinion announcement -- a summary of the majority and Breyer's dissent included -- which is the sort of thing that the news organizations want available immediately. More recent cases also are available, including (if not totally comprehensive) opinion announcement material.
As the discussion notes, current practice is for the Supreme Court to wait to the end of the week to release oral argument audio, which along with labeling the justices who ask questions and even having a website at all, only has been begun in the last few years. Before they did this, the USSC in a few cases (such as the Solomon Amendment case involving military recruiter access to campuses that got Kagan in a bit of trouble) chose a few cases for same day audio. That is, even though they didn't play it live (as C-SPAN does for congressional coverage), it is a sort of "live on tape" deal. They can, of course, do this as well for the opinion announcement (and quite possible dissent from the bench) here too. If they wished.
Although it is not unprecedented for the Court to do something it has never done previously, the chances that it will grant this request appear to be remote to non-existent.This amuses me a bit, especially since the PPACA is supposedly "something ... never done previously." There really is not real good reason, if you are going to have argument audio, not to also have audio of opinion announcements. They are done publicly and be they not binding like opinions, they have clear value like the also not binding headnotes found in each slip opinion.* Some federal appeals courts (at least, I know the 9th does it) deign to give the public warning beforehand when a ruling will be handed down, not having them be on pins and needles each and every time opinion day comes. The USSC merely needs to release a transcript and/or audio of what the people there already hear.
The justices repeatedly tell people to read their opinions to understand their stance on specific issues but the practice of providing summaries during opinion announcements suggest they are willing to do more. These tend to be a few minutes long though can be over five minutes in length; but, we are still not talking that much time. The gun case was well summarized by Justice Alito in a way the general public could understand. Other highlights would include Planned Parenthood v. Casey (twenty year anniversary) or Lawrence v. Texas, each with a dissent from the bench. Why not this too?
The Supreme Court is sometimes said to be a teacher of republican values and has in recent years done some important things to fulfill this duty, down to writing books and making public appearances to different forums. Immediate release, instead of a wait of months to it is available on a still largely unknown website, of the opinion announcement of the PPACA cases would be in this spirit. It need not be live. They can even wait until the end of the week. Instead, the public will be left with a shorthand version through the medium of the people making this request.
That's just silly.
---
* Each opinion with such comments has this disclaimer:
Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued.The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader.The USSC provides a summary of the case when announcing it for "the convenience" and guidance of the audience too.