The US Supreme Court has blocked cameras for the Proposition 8 trial in California, overturning the decision by the Chief Judge of the 9th Circuit to allow those cameras.
Linda Greenhouse has an interesting column about the cameras issue both in the Prop 8 case and more generally, then turns to several other first amendment cases related to the politics of same-sex marriage. She concludes:
The issue of cameras in the courtroom, presented by the California case the court ruled on this week, is itself of long standing. But it has typically been seen as posing a free-press-versus-fair-trial question — in terms of First Amendment doctrine, a claim by those behind rather than in front of the camera. This week’s development suggests that a merger of two separate lines of First Amendment precedent, one on freedom from compelled disclosure and the other on access to government proceedings, may not be far off. In fact, in this media-saturated age, it may be overdue. Whether this deeply divided court can navigate the contested terrain of same-sex marriage to arrive at a useful synthesis is another question.
The column also has some gossip-y info about intrajudicial squabbling, check it out.