Reporters told to erase audio recordings of Scalia speech to high school students

HATTIESBURG, Miss (AP) — Two reporters were ordered Wednesday to erase their tape recordings of a speech by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia at a Mississippi high school.

Scalia has long barred television cameras from his speeches, but does not always forbid newspaper photographers and tape recorders. On Wednesday, he did not warn the audience at the high school that recording devices would be forbidden.

During the speech, a woman identifying herself as a deputy federal marshal demanded that a reporter for The Associated Press erase a tape recording of the justice's comments. She said the justice had asked that his appearance not be recorded.

The reporter initially resisted, but later showed the deputy how to erase the digital recording after the officer took the device from her hands. The exchange occurred in the front row of the auditorium while Scalia delivered his speech about the Constitution.

The deputy, who identified herself as Melanie Rube, also made a reporter for The Hattiesburg American erase her tape.

Scalia gave two speeches Wednesday in Hattiesburg, one at Presbyterian Christian High School and the other at William Carey College. The recording-device warning was made before the college speech.

At a reception following Scalia's speech at William Carey, the justice told television reporters from Hattiesburg station WDAM-TV to leave. A member of his entourage also told newspaper photographers they could not take pictures, but a college official reversed the order after non-media guests started snapping photos.

William Carey spokeswoman Jeanna Graves later sent an apology to the media.

"I specifically asked for protocol and was told that the media would have access to Justice Scalia during the reception," Graves wrote in an e-mail. She said she was "embarrassed and angry" over the incident.

Supreme Court spokeswoman Kathy Arberg said that it is up to Scalia and his staff to set guidelines for coverage of his events.

"It's standard that his speeches are not televised," she said.

Last year, Scalia was criticized for refusing to allow television and radio coverage of an event in Ohio in which he received an award for supporting free speech.

Scalia, who was appointed to the bench by President Reagan in 1986, told students that the Constitution's true meaning must always be protected.

"The Constitution of the United States is extraordinary and amazing. People just don't revere it like they used to," Scalia told a full auditorium of high school students, officials, religious leaders.

He said he spends most of his time thinking about the Constitution, calling it "a brilliant piece of work."

Scalia has said time and time again that only the plain language of the constitution should be heeded, and that judicial interpretation of the meaning or intent of that language is wrong. It's a very short document, even including the amendments. If he spends most of his time thinking about it, then he is either wrong in his textualist approach or he is a very.... slow.... reader. [img]graemlins/heee.gif[/img]

<font face="Verdana" size="3" color="#00FF00">I am not sure what the big deal is. So he doesn't want to be recorded, or taped. This does not violate free speech as he is the one doing the talking and should be able to choose if he wants his speeches recorded. I think denying someone access to media is a violation of free speech, not denying the media access to his speech. Is it freedom of speech or freedom of the press to do what they want? The press can still say what they want, they just will not be able to back up what they say as absolute truth. Doesn't the man have the right to privacy?</font>

[ 04-12-2004, 02:05 PM: Message edited by: pritchke ]

Well, Pritchke, public figures sort of give up their right to privacy. It's just part of being a public figure in this country.

Last time I went to a concert they threw a guy out on his ear because he had a tape recorder, and he'd paid to be there. If he bought the cheapest ticket, like I did, he was out $75. ;)

[ 04-12-2004, 02:35 PM: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]

Before anyone points out that recording their music would be illegal, I'll have to say they didn't allow cameras either. They were most definately public figures, but the right to do certain things is based on the venue, eh? ;)

I'd say Scalia does it just to keep from being annoyed by the media everywhere he goes. Judges are not known to be avid fans of the media, who'd rather ruin a trial if they can ("break" a story about a trial and you sometimes "break" the judicial system, too -- contamination of jury pool, etc.). I'd bet that the 9 SCOTUS judges hate the media even more, because now they are judges trying to maintain decorum AND they are famous.

Personally, in my cases where the media was involved, I said nothing I didn't have to. I denied access to my clients and refused to respond to snipes made in the media by the other side. Why bother? -- they will only misquote me anyway.

[ 04-12-2004, 02:48 PM: Message edited by: Timber Loftis ]

OFF TOPIC!

Is it just me or does SCOTUS sound... scrotum-esque?

SORRY FOR THE INTERUPTION.... EVERYONE PLEASE JUST MOVE ALONG.....

Dirty Monkey [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Maybe they could get Scalia to change it opinion if they started to wildly mis-quote him after his speeches [img]smile.gif[/img]


"Then in his speech Justice Scalia stated his support for repealing the 2nd, 4th and 6th amendments to the delight of the crowd"