Justice Bans Media From Free Speech Event

[Rokenn]

Note: This is NOT an Onion article [img]graemlins/laugh2.gif[/img]

Justice Bans Media From Free Speech Event
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

CLEVELAND (AP) -- Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia banned broadcast media from an appearance Wednesday where he will receive an award for supporting free speech.

The City Club usually tapes speakers for later broadcast on public television, but Scalia insisted on banning television and radio coverage, the club said. Scalia is being given the organization's Citadel of Free Speech Award.

``I might wish it were otherwise, but that was one of the criteria that he had for acceptance,'' said James Foster, the club's executive director.

The ban on broadcast media, ``begs disbelief and seems to be in conflict with the award itself,'' C-SPAN vice president and executive producer Terry Murphy wrote in a letter last week to the City Club. ``How free is speech if there are limits to its distribution?''

The City Club selected Scalia because he has ``consistently, across the board, had opinions or led the charge in support of free speech,'' Foster said.

Cameras and recording devices are banned from the Supreme Court chamber, and Scalia prefers not to have camera coverage in other settings, said Kathleen Arberg, spokeswoman for the court.

Scalia made the same demand on John Carroll University, where he spoke Tuesday night. He talked mostly about the constitutional protection of religions, but also said that government has room to scale back individual rights during wartime without violating the Constitution.

``The Constitution just sets minimums,'' Scalia said. ``Most of the rights that you enjoy go way beyond what the Constitution requires.''

[realbinky]

I don't see an issue. HOW does that limit free speech? A reporter can take notes, and then report on what was said, or he can do it from memory. How does not being able to RECORD it restrict their ability to distribute their free speech. He's not saying they can't tape THEMSELVES saying anything they want and send that out. He's asking that they not tape HIM, and that's perfectly fine.

[Rokenn]

Originally posted by realbinky: I don't see an issue. HOW does that limit free speech? A reporter can take notes, and then report on what was said, or he can do it from memory. How does not being able to RECORD it restrict their ability to distribute their free speech. He's not saying they can't tape THEMSELVES saying anything they want and send that out. He's asking that they not tape HIM, and that's perfectly fine.

I would normally agree, but he is a government official, declaring that certain forms of media not cover his appearance. He may technically within his rights, but it does go against the intention of the award.

Plus I found the end of the article a little chilling, indicating that the current court may go along with things like Patriot II.

[Azred]

Originally posted by Rokenn: Scalia made the same demand on John Carroll University, where he spoke Tuesday night. He talked mostly about the constitutional protection of religions, but also said that government has room to scale back individual rights during wartime without violating the Constitution. ``The Constitution just sets minimums,'' Scalia said. ``Most of the rights that you enjoy go way beyond what the Constitution requires.''

[img]graemlins/erm.gif[/img] It's no wonder he wanted a media blackout. His comments warrant several questions: 1) What, exactly, are these minimums? 2) Which rights can go away at the government's request?
I think Scalia could open a Pandora's Box that even he doesn't want opened by saying things like this.

[Donut]

Now that is ironic.

[Sir Kenyth]

With comments like the one saying we enjoy too many rights, I can see why he doesn't want to be recorded.

[Timber Loftis]

Scalia is a harsh conservative, and a constitutional textualist - meaning he believes the pipe dream notion that you can apply the constitution as written without judicial interpretation. I dislike most of Scalia's comments, I realize that he is the hero of Justice Thomas (the Supreme Court's resident Uncle Tom), and I think he is generally... well, pretty evil.

That said, I don't see the issue with keeping the media out of the speech. I agree that reporters can listen and write and then report. I don't see how "freedom of speech" translates into "freedom for media glam." One says you can say what you want. The other says big bucks sensationalists have the right to turn what you say into the next B-movie or 15-minutes of fame segment for Ashley Banfield. 2 very different things.

And, this is a fine example of what he meant when he said the rights we enjoy go way beyond the constitution. And on that point, I agree.