united states supreme court Tag Archives - Atlanta Injury Lawyer Blog

I am sitting here in my office at my desk watching the Georgia Supreme Court oral arguments today, October 21, 2025, on my computer. I am able to do this because the Georgia Supreme Court televises live all of its oral arguments, even when it travels around the State of Georgia for special oral arguments. You and anyone in the world can watch oral arguments by going to the Georgia Supreme Court’s website and simply clicking LIVE Oral Arguments. It’s that easy and that simple. And that’s exactly as it should be.

The live feed of the Georgia Supreme Court focuses on each speaker, whether it is the attorney or the Justice and identifies each Justice as they ask questions. In this way, the public knows which Justice is speaking, and can see for itself how seriously the Court takes every matter before it. And how seriously every lawyer takes being before the Court. If any citizen of Georgia ever had any doubt about how the Georgia Supreme Court operates and how seriously it takes its oath to do Justice and uphold the Georgia Constitution, watching oral arguments would quickly alleviate that doubt. The Georgia Supreme Court’s live televised oral arguments allows every Georgia citizen (and really anyone in the world who is watching) to have complete confidence in our Georgia Justice System and in the degree of due process given to everyone before the Court. Any citizen can also go in person to the Georgia Supreme Court to watch oral arguments. The Court is open to the public for good reason. All of this engenders confidence in our legal system and the Rule of Law.

Now let’s turn to the United States Supreme Court, which, in my opinion, operates in the dark, just the opposite of the Georgia Supreme Court. The United States Supreme Court does NOT televise their oral arguments live, and does NOT have an open courtroom, and this leads to doubt about what it is doing, lack of confidence in its rulings and lack of respect of the Court by the general public. With the Court’s recent unprecedented uptick in the use of its so-called “emergency docket,” nicknamed “the Shadow Docket,” it goes further down in public opinion and confidence.

The concept of an “Open Court” has been back in the news lately with the efforts of numerous groups to try to convince the United States Supreme Court to broadcast live the oral arguments on the marriage equality case coming up in April. I am a proponent of that. In this day and age of online streaming and immediate tweeting there is simply no good, legitimate reason not to allow all Americans live access to what is going on in the Country’s highest Court as it is happening. But the Justices on the U.S. Supreme Court, apparently, disagree. I understand that one objection to live broadcasting of arguments from Justice Kagen and Justice Sotomayor is they are afraid broadcasting arguments live might induce counsel before them to engage in theatrics and shenanigans. Folks, that is ridiculous. Utterly ridiculous. The Georgia Supreme Court has been broadcasting oral arguments before it for years without even a hint of theatrics from the counsel who appear before them. Members of the State Bar of Georgia are required to use the utmost deference before any judge, but particularly the Supreme Court. All members of the Bar know the proper etiquette to employ before the Court. The Court doesn’t have to worry about anything unseemly happening. And should there be any doubt about this whatsoever the Court is constantly manned by Georgia State Patrol Troopers. No one is going to do anything they shouldn’t do. This would be the same for the United States Supreme Court. The Georgia Court of Appeals, unfortunately, does not, at the moment, permit cameras in their courtroom. There is no explanation why other than perhaps a budgetary one. It is my understanding that when a new Judicial Building is built, in the footprint of the current Georgia Archives building, the Georgia Court of Appeals will then be equipped to allow live broadcast of oral arguments. I hope that is sooner rather than later.

The United States Supreme Court may be feeling the heat. It typically makes audio recordings of oral hearings before it available at the end of the week. In the marriage equality case, the Court announced it would make the audio recording available the day after the hearing. In its most recent announcement on the subject, the Court has even moved that up and has indicated it will now make the audio recording of the argument available to the public that afternoon, the same day as the oral argument. If this is true, ask yourself: what is the difference between that and simply allowing all Americans to hear the argument in real time, in the privacy of their homes or at their work desks? I can imagine “oral argument parties” where citizens host viewing parties complete with coffee and Krispy Kreme doughnuts (make mine a Java Chip, please), or maybe Mimosas and Bloody Marys, so that they may enjoy the arguments in the company of their friends who are of like mind. After all, most things have richer meaning when they are shared experiences.

The push for transparency of the United States Supreme Court is nothing new…it has been going on for years. Here is why it is so important. Our nation was founded on the concept of self-government, that “We The People” decide how our government will behave and “We The People” will decide how to govern ourselves according to the Rule of the Law and the sacred Constitution, which men fought and died for so we could be a Free Nation. The United States Supreme Court is the final arbiter of the Law. It is the only body in our Nation that decides with finality whether something does not violate the U. S. Constitution. Do men and women not respect something and hold onto its principles more when they have been involved in its making? When they can see for themselves the fairness and equality used in its creation? Lack of information breeds suspicion. Secrecy creates mistrust. With suspicion and mistrust comes their ugly cousin, contempt. Why would the United States Supreme Court wish to risk such a side effect of their rulings? Why wouldn’t the Supreme Court want their opinions to be embraced by “We The People,” such that their opinions would have the stamp of authority with the public they rightfully should? It could easily be accomplished simply by livestreaming their oral arguments.

Articles Tagged with united states supreme court

United States Supreme Court Oral Arguments Should Be Televised For the Sake of the Rule of Law

What Does “Open Court” Mean?