C-K Faculty Blog

Cameras and the Courtroom Dynamic

The following article by Professor Nancy Marder first appeared in Jurist.

Illinois, which has allowed cameras in its appellate courts and its supreme court since 1983, recently opened up its trial courts to cameras as part of a pilot program. Illinois is part of a growing movement to have cameras in the courtroom. This movement can be seen on the state level, not only in Illinois, but also in Pennsylvania, Minnesota and South Dakota. These states have amended their procedures to make them more accessible to cameras. All 50 states now permit cameras in their courts, albeit with various restrictions. On the federal level, the Judicial Conference recently approved a pilot program, which is being conducted by the Federal Judicial Center, in which 14 district courts are experimenting with cameras in the courtroom. Although the US Supreme Court has resisted permitting cameras during oral argument, Congress has been working on legislation that would allow cameras in the Supreme Court. On February 9, 2012, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted 11-7 in favor of having cameras in the US Supreme Court. A similar bill, the Cameras in the Courtroom Act of 2011, is still pending in the House Judiciary Committee.

The Constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

The following was originally posted by Professor Sheldon Nahmod on Nahmodlaw.

On January 18, 2012, I blogged about the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act whose constitutionality is currently before the Supreme Court.

In that post, I focused on the Commerce Clause challenge to the individual mandate.

On February 10, 2012, I participated in an hour-long discussion of the overall constitutionality of the Act at a program sponsored by the Shriver Center and held in Chicago.

This discussion, which was videotaped, covered the Commerce Clause, the Taxing Power, the expansion of Medicaid, and even the federal Tax Injunction Act.

Below is the Youtube link to this discussion. I hope you find it of interest.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q5xILq82ZD0

 

U.S. v. Jones: Protecting Privacy in the Digital Age

This was originally posted by Lori Andrews on the Social Network Constitution Blog.

As technology makes surveillance easier and cheaper, courts are grappling with how to apply the Fourth Amendment in the digital age.  Prior to beepers, GPS, people checking in on Foursquare, and social networks, law enforcement monitoring of suspected offenders was limited by the constraints of manpower, budget and the risk that the officers following suspects might themselves be seen. 

But now an increasing amount of information about people’s whereabouts, activities, purchases and intentions can be gleaned digitally, without an officer ever leaving the station.  The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision this month in United States v. Jones provides little guidance about which activities might be considered searches, which require warrants, and which voluntary disclosures to third parties might waive Fourth Amendment rights.