Judicial Conference Opposes Bill to Bring Cameras into Federal Courts

Judicial Conference Opposes Bill to Bring Cameras into Federal Courts

A representative of the Judicial Conference of the United States today told the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Administrative Oversight and the Courts that a bill to allow cameras in courtrooms could "seriously jeopardize" the rights of citizens to receive a constitutionally guaranteed right to a fair trial.

Chief Judge Edward R. Becker of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit appeared before the subcommittee to express the Judiciary's strong opposition to cameras in the courtroom. The bill, S. 721, would allow media coverage of court proceedings.

"The Judicial Conference in its role as the policy-making body for the federal Judiciary has consistently expressed the view that camera coverage can do irreparable harm to a citizen's right to a fair and impartial trial. We believe that the intimidating effect of cameras on litigants, witnesses, and jurors has a profoundly negative impact on the trial process," said Judge Becker. "Moreover, in civil cases cameras can intimidate civil defendants who, regardless of the merits of their case, might prefer to settle rather than risk damaging accusations in a televised trial."

A Federal Judicial Center study of a three-year Judicial Conference pilot program allowing electronic media coverage of civil proceedings in six district and two appellate courts, found that 64 percent of the participating judges reported that, at least to some extent, cameras make witnesses more nervous than they otherwise would be. In addition 46 percent of the judges believed that, at least to some extent, cameras make witnesses less willing to appear in court, and 41 percent found that, at least to some extent, cameras distract witnesses.

Judge Becker also pointed out that as an educational tool for the public, the Judiciary's own community outreach efforts have been demonstratively more effective than proposed camera coverage in presenting basic educational information about the legal system. A Federal Judicial Center report on media coverage during the three-year pilot project concluded that of 90 stories analyzed, there was an average of 56 seconds of courtroom footage per story and most of the footage was voiced over by a reporter's narration. Seventy-seven percent failed to identify the type of proceeding involved. "Television news coverage appears simply to use the courtroom for a backdrop or a visual image for the news story which, like most stories on television," said Judge Becker, "are delivered in short sound bites and not in-depth."

The Judiciary has repeatedly examined the issue for over six decades. Criminal rules adopted in 1946 included a prohibition on electronic media coverage of criminal proceedings. In 1972, the Judicial Conference adopted a prohibition against "broadcasting, televising, recording or taking photographs in the courtroom and areas immediately adjacent thereto. . ." that applied to criminal and civil cases. In 1988 the Conference revisited the issue and recommended the Judiciary begin a three-year pilot program allowing electronic media coverage of civil proceedings in six district and two appellate courts. A 1994 study of the pilot project by the Federal Judicial Center convinced the Judicial Conference that the potentially intimidating effect of cameras on some witnesses and jurors was cause for considerable concern. In 1996 the Conference again considered the issue and voted to strongly urge each circuit judicial council to adopt an order not to permit the taking of photographs or radio and television coverage of proceedings in district courts. The Conference left it up to the appellate courts whether or not they would adopt similar rules, and all but two courts of appeals subsequently adopted prohibitions.

"This is not a debate about whether judges would be discomfited with camera coverage," Judge Becker told the subcommittee. "Nor is it a debate about whether the federal courts are afraid of public scrutiny. They are not. . . . It is also not about increasing the educational opportunities for the public to learn about the federal courts or the litigation process. . . . Rather this is a decision about how individual Americans, whether they are plaintiffs, defendants, witnesses, or jurors, are treated by the federal judicial process. It is the fundamental duty of the federal Judiciary to ensure that every citizen receives his or her constitutionally guaranteed right to a fair trial. The Judicial Conference believes that the use of cameras in the courtroom could seriously jeopardize that right. It is that concern that causes the Judicial Conference of the United States to oppose enactment of S. 721."

Note: The complete testimony of Chief Judge Edward R. Becker on S. 721 before the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Administrative Oversight and the Courts is available on the Judiciary's website at www.uscourts.gov.