Shine a Light: Televised Oral Arguments and Judicial Legitimacy

Christopher  Kromphardt

University of Alabama – Department of Political Science

2013

APSA 2013 Annual Meeting PaperAbstract:

    
While the United States Supreme Court has historically been opposed to opening its proceedings to televising, the same cannot be said for all federal courts in the United States. These courts provide an opportunity to study the determinants of how courts exercise the discretion to televise. The practice of selectively televising can have implications for a court’s legitimacy, and in turn its ability to exercise judicial review. I incorporate distinguishing features of televising as a form of judicial public relations into a model explaining how allowing televising can a ffect the court’s legitimacy. Using data from a prominent federal appeals court, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, I begin to analyze implications of this model on patterns in this court’s decisions whether to grant a media request to allow televising. While my findings are preliminary, they raise further questions about the sources of circuit court legitimacy and interactions between the circuit and Supreme courts.