# Hooray for US Supreme Court Justices!! **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [April 8, 2004, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hooray-for-us-supreme-court-justices/239001 "2004-04-08T18:26:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![633squadron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/6/ee59a6/32.png) [@633squadron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/633squadron)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2004, 1:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hooray-for-us-supreme-court-justices/239001/21 "2004-04-10T01:50:01Z")
> [@Inigo Montoya](#): > > Synopsis: US SUPREME COURT JUSTICE is giving a speech on the US constution, and reporters are not allowed to record the event. I read through the stories. The organizers of the event did not object to tape-recording or other recording. Reporters and others that showed up assumed that there would be no problem. **Scalia** has a known policy forbidding tape-recording, etc. I’m darned if I know why, but that’s his policy. Apparently the organizers and Scalia’s people were not on the “same page.” So Scalia’s security people stepped in, believing themselves to be “in the right.” Wrong. Legal experts are debating if Scalia had the right to confiscate recorders/destroy recordings if there was no injunction from the outset. The organizers are hopping mad at Scalia. IMHO, Scalia’s stance on this is a Dumb Idea. Every scenario I can think of makes him look arrogant, or contemptuous of civil rights, or both. And, to have federal security agents _confiscate recorders or attempt to erase recordings?_. How can he _possibly_ expect to look good from that? Regardless of what I thought of him before (and I was never very impressed), I can’t now think that he’s _smarter_ than I took him to be. Sheesh! This guy needs to get a life! Or at least a competent PR agent. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2004, 12:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hooray-for-us-supreme-court-justices/239001/22 "2004-04-14T12:34:14Z")
I’m bumping this thread because of recent developments. Scalia has sent letters of apology to the reporters from the AP and the Hattiesburg American. [http://www.hattiesburgamerican.com/news/updates/5598.html](http://www.hattiesburgamerican.com/news/updates/5598.html) [http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/printer/ap.asp?category=1110&slug=Scalia%20Recording](http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/printer/ap.asp?category=1110&slug=Scalia%20Recording) I believe Scalia was right to set the terms of how the speech was to be recorded, if at all. The issue here was that some of these terms weren’t clear at the outset, and were then enforced badly by agents of the government that were there to provide for Justice Scalia’s physical security only. Certainly an apology was warranted, and one has been proffered. Hopefully things will be managed better in the future. ---
**Author:** ![Inigo\_Montoya](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/inigo_montoya/32/124_2.png) [@Inigo\_Montoya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inigo_Montoya)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2004, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hooray-for-us-supreme-court-justices/239001/23 "2004-04-14T16:01:31Z")
Harumph. > [@](#): > > “I have learned my lesson (at your expense), and shall certainly be more careful in the future,” Sounds like a very tender and sincere apology. Can I still use him as a bogeyman? _knock __knock__ knock_ EEK: Who’s there? BOGEYMAN: Bogey man. EEK: Who? BOGEYMAN: Bogey man. I’ve come to get you. EEK: Oh. Come in. :enter the devil dressed badly in plaid polyester jacket and heavy gold chain necklace: BOGEYMAN: Do you know why they call me “The Bogey Man?” (dancing badly) It’s. 'Cause. I… boogey boogey bogey… EEK: Eeeeeeeeek! ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2004, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hooray-for-us-supreme-court-justices/239001/24 "2004-04-14T16:13:46Z")
Does Scalia have the right to specify conditions for his appearances? Certainly. But I believe it morally wrong for any public official to forbid recording of any public appearance. If he doesn’t like the press, he may choose either to leave office or stop making appearances. Does Scalia have the right to use US Marshals as his own personal thugs? No. The marshals should have refused to do his bidding. Reporters should have refused to comply with the marshals. The whole mess illustrates Scalia’s unfitness for the position. If he is the beacon of truth, then his message should not offer either political party any ammunition. If he is not the beacon of truth, he’s in the wrong job. ---
**Author:** ![meara](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df705f/32.png) [@meara](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/meara)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2004, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hooray-for-us-supreme-court-justices/239001/25 "2004-04-14T20:02:15Z")
Not the strongest defense, but… It’s possible that Scalia and other camera-shy public figures are worried about the power of soundbites taken out of context. He may prefer that people hear reporters quoting snippets or paraphrasing him rather than seeing a few video clips snipped, rearranged and strung together in a way that changes their meaning. (Sure you can do the same with quotes, but it’s not quite as powerful.) ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2004, 11:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hooray-for-us-supreme-court-justices/239001/26 "2004-04-14T23:11:45Z")
Unfortunately, I can’t find an unabridgded copy of the letter from Scalia, but [these](http://www.hattiesburgamerican.com/news/stories/20040414/opinion/232039.html) [two](http://www.hattiesburgamerican.com/news/stories/20040414/localnews/231924.html) stories make it clear that Scalia is leaving the Marshalls out to hang in the wind. He is as apalled as any of us, > [@](#): > > …and the fault was mine in not assuming that the ground rules had been clarified," he wrote. "(To tell the truth, even if they had been clarified and some reporter had broken them, I would not have wanted the tape erased… So I will be very interested in the reply from the US Marshall’s office. How did this Marshall come to this misunderstanding of how to deal with the press? ---
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2004, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hooray-for-us-supreme-court-justices/239001/27 "2004-04-15T15:38:18Z")
Looks to me like Scalia is scrambling to avoid winding up on the wrong end of a lawsuit. Watch him squirm! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hooray-for-us-supreme-court-justices/239001.md?page=1)