This time it's Justice Sotomayor who's changed her mind. She favored televising Supreme Court arguments during her confirmation hearing, but according to this National Law Journal story now says that televised oral arguments could be "more misleading than helpful" to viewers who don't understand the issues before the court. In reversing her position she joins Justices Ginsburg, Alito, and Kagan in executing a flip on the issue. ABA Journal speculates that one possible explanation for the Justices' reticence could be what opponents of Obamacare did with the official audio of the oral arguments on the Affordable Care Act, editing a Marco-Rubio-moment portion of the Solicitor General's argument in a misleading way:
In the actual opening, Verrilli paused once to drink water and stopped talking for a few seconds before he continued, Bloomberg revealed. In the altered ad, however, he pauses for about 20 seconds, coughs, sips water and stutters. “Obamacare,” the ad reads. “It’s a tough sell.”
The Supreme Court had resisted making even the audio of oral arguments available to the public up until very recent times. The Michigan Supreme Court, in contrast, is not camera-shy. Its oral arguments are broadcast by MGTV, and the videos are available on the State Bar website.
