NEW YORK – Today The New York Times is calling for cameras in the Supreme Court. And they’re right: The highest court in the land, more than any other, should “allow coverage of oral arguments similar to C-Span’s valuable coverage of the house and senate.”

But The Times is late to the game. For years Court TV argued for cameras in all federal courts, including the Supreme Court. Now, as In Session, we will continue that fight.

Our Senior Editor, Fred Graham, who for many years covered the Supreme Court, has traveled the country arguing for increased access in state courts. As he points out, no trial in the U.S. has been overturned in more than 40 years because a TV camera was present. The fight to open the federal courts is even more daunting.

Across the board, the federal courts simply do not allow cameras. Period. William Rehnquist, who in is capacity as Chief Justice also headed up the federal courts, was notoriously opposed to cameras.

One can only hope that a new generation of justices will come to understand that the right to a “public” trial includes the right to have that trial televised.

– Jami Floyd, In Session anchor