Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
MS-Now: Supreme Court justices take the bench today. They don't want you to see, or even hear, them.
The justices will announce some of their most important rulings in open court, but they refuse to broadcast their announcements live.Link: https://www.ms.now/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/supreme-court-stream-opinions-live-audio-transparency
Jun. 25, 2026, 6:00 AM EDT
By Jordan Rubin
Jordan Rubin is the Deadline: Legal Blog writer. He was a prosecutor for the New York County District Attorney’s Office in Manhattan and is the author of “Bizarro," a book about the secret war on synthetic drugs. Before he joined MS NOW, he was a legal reporter for Bloomberg Law.
Supreme Court justices are set to take the bench Thursday morning to announce their latest rulings in cases argued this term. They won’t say which ones are coming ahead of time, but among the remaining rulings are ones on birthright citizenship and other consequential decisions for America’s future.
Yet all Americans won’t see or even hear the justices as they make these important announcements in open court. The opinions will be posted on the court’s website as the justices summarize them. But that doesn’t excuse the court’s lack of transparency.
Think about the birthright citizenship case, for example, to understand why the court’s practice does not make sense. When it was argued in April, anyone with internet access could tune in live to hear the audio of the hearing in real time. When the resulting ruling is announced, however, there will be no such live audio, even though both the hearing and the opinion announcement will happen in the same public courtroom. It’s not a technological obstacle.
Nor does the court view opinion announcements as so sensitive that no one can hear them, because these sessions are open to however many people can fit into the courtroom on a given day. Nor does the court view opinion announcements as so sensitive that everyone can’t hear them eventually, because the audio is typically published at some point during the following court term. It’s only that the court does not want everyone to be able to tune in live for these announcements in the same way that it lets people tune in for hearings.
What could possibly justify the court’s selective transparency?
A common attempt at an explanation is that an opinion announcement is a summary of the ruling spoken by the opinion’s author, as opposed to a verbatim readout. Therefore, the argument goes, it would be pointless or even confusing or harmful to broadcast information that is not precisely the ruling, especially when the ruling is on the court’s website for all to read....
- more at link -
By Jordan Rubin
Jordan Rubin is the Deadline: Legal Blog writer. He was a prosecutor for the New York County District Attorney’s Office in Manhattan and is the author of “Bizarro," a book about the secret war on synthetic drugs. Before he joined MS NOW, he was a legal reporter for Bloomberg Law.
Supreme Court justices are set to take the bench Thursday morning to announce their latest rulings in cases argued this term. They won’t say which ones are coming ahead of time, but among the remaining rulings are ones on birthright citizenship and other consequential decisions for America’s future.
Yet all Americans won’t see or even hear the justices as they make these important announcements in open court. The opinions will be posted on the court’s website as the justices summarize them. But that doesn’t excuse the court’s lack of transparency.
Think about the birthright citizenship case, for example, to understand why the court’s practice does not make sense. When it was argued in April, anyone with internet access could tune in live to hear the audio of the hearing in real time. When the resulting ruling is announced, however, there will be no such live audio, even though both the hearing and the opinion announcement will happen in the same public courtroom. It’s not a technological obstacle.
Nor does the court view opinion announcements as so sensitive that no one can hear them, because these sessions are open to however many people can fit into the courtroom on a given day. Nor does the court view opinion announcements as so sensitive that everyone can’t hear them eventually, because the audio is typically published at some point during the following court term. It’s only that the court does not want everyone to be able to tune in live for these announcements in the same way that it lets people tune in for hearings.
What could possibly justify the court’s selective transparency?
A common attempt at an explanation is that an opinion announcement is a summary of the ruling spoken by the opinion’s author, as opposed to a verbatim readout. Therefore, the argument goes, it would be pointless or even confusing or harmful to broadcast information that is not precisely the ruling, especially when the ruling is on the court’s website for all to read....
Heads-up everyone ... there should be multiple rulings from SCOTUS posted on their website today and tomorrow, once they've had the opportunity to scoot out of town for their 4th of July vacay.
1 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
