Breaking: Supreme Court Blocked Cameras from Prop 8 Trial.

[Born_A_Truman]

"The Supreme Court has indefinitely blocked cameras from covering the high-profile federal court trial on the constitutionality of California's ban on same-sex marriage. The high court split 5-4 Wednesday, with the conservative justices in the majority." -- Associated Press, 1:51 p.m., Wednesday, January 13

Just got an email from RIck Jacobs, Courage Campaign.

Dear Pat --


The Supreme Court just struck a huge blow against transparency and accountability.

This historic trial will remain largely hidden from public view, despite it's historic potential to challenge and change the minds of Americans. Now, without video, it's even more critical that we continue to get the truth out about the Prop 8 trial.

That's why we launched the Prop 8 Trial Tracker web site on Monday -- and why it's been viewed more than 200,000 times in three days, as thousands of people share the site on Facebook, Twitter and blogs.

To boost coverage of the trial -- and add more live-bloggers -- so that we can cover as much of it as possible as a public service, we need your help immediately.

Despite the Supreme Court's ruling, we can't allow the Prop 8 supporters to hide this trial from the American people. If you have not contributed to support the Prop 8 Trial Tracker, please help us reach our goal of 2,000 total contributors for truth ASAP. DEADLINE: 5 pm Friday:

http://www.couragecampaign.org/GetTheTruthOut

[NightWatcher]

1. are they ashamed of their bigotry?

why else to keep it in the dark

[Born_A_Truman]

2. Exactly!

[SoCalNative]

4. Federal trials have NEVER allowed cameras in the courtroom

Why should this one be any different?

[ManiacJoe]

5. Exactly.

Pick a different recording media, and cover the trial just like every other trial.

[Unvanguard]

10. That's not quite true, as the dissenting opinion indicates.

It's uncommon, but it's been done; the decision to broadcast it was the result of a considerable degree of experimentation with it in the Ninth Circuit.

Edit: The real break with precedent here is not the broadcast proposal, but the Supreme Court intervention in the kinds of policy matters usually left to the district courts themselves.

[FiveGoodMen]

3. So nice how the Dems rolled over for two Bush nominees.

5-4

[Bluebear]

6. YES INDEED

[Unvanguard]

9. Might have gone the same way with O'Connor, and probably with any alternative Bush nominee.

Kennedy voted with the majority.

[dickthegrouch]

7. How exactly are moving images different from the photos in the newspaper?

I don't get it.

The majority voted against equality.

As usual the minority are having to stand out proud and let the majority (who are convinced they were doing a good thing until the cameras became a possibility) hide in the closet.

The people more likely to be discriminated against (the gay plaintiffs) have their pictures on the front page of the newspaper.

How is viewing a video of the proceedings going to make them any more likely to be harmed?

There is something SERIOUSLY WRONG with this decision.

[Unvanguard]

8. Technically, they only blocked transmission of the trial to other courthouses around the country.

The Internet transmission never got final approval from the Court of Appeals, and so was not addressed by the Supreme Court.