Travesty: Supreme Court (And Senate) Deny SCOTUSblog A Press Pass
from the shameful dept
So we just had a story about a court recognizing that, yes, blogs are a part of the media, and noted how ridiculous it was that this is still an issue in 2014. However, it appears that the Supreme Court is still living in a different century (okay, maybe not a huge surprise, since they still haven't figured out email). If you follow issues around litigation, it's likely that sooner or later you'll read SCOTUSblog, which is (deservedly) the go to source for anything related to anything having to do with Supreme Court cases. On mornings when decisions come out, it's always the first source I check, and I'm hardly alone among legal watchers.And yet... the Supreme Court has denied SCOTUSblog's request for a press pass based on a stupidly convoluted system for which the Senate is partly to blame as well. According to SCOTUSblog:
SCOTUSblog is not now, and has never been, credentialed by the Supreme Court. The Court’s longstanding policy was to look to credentials issued by the Senate. We pursued a Senate credential for several years, modifying several policies of the blog to address concerns expressed by the Gallery. Last year, we finally succeeded – the Senate Press Gallery credentialed Lyle as a reporter for SCOTUSblog. We then presented that credential to the Supreme Court, thinking that the issue was resolved.This is complicated further by the fact that the Senate Press Gallery has now rejected SCOTUSblog's request for a press pass, and also told the blog it will not renew Lyle's press pass -- thereby cutting off the blog to both the Senate and the Court. SCOTUSblog's Tom Goldstein does note that the Supreme Court itself has actually tried to accommodate the blog's requests for public seats, despite not agreeing to give it a press pass. The situation is clearly ridiculous:
But the Court declined to recognize the credential, explaining that it would instead review its credentialing policy. The Court has not indicated when that review will conclude.
All that said, the Senate Press Gallery’s decision to deny us a credential is important to us. We wanted the credential in substantial part because we cover Supreme Court-related matters in the Senate. Most significantly, we do gavel-to-gavel, liveblog coverage of Supreme Court nominations. We also expect to cover hearings related to the Court’s budget. So those efforts are now more difficult.I don't think "strange" is the right word. Shameful works better. Stupid would apply as well.
So we plan to appeal the Senate Gallery’s credentialing decision. We do not have a written list of the reasons for the denial, which makes the process more difficult. Our impression is also that the appeal may go to the same group that denied the application in the first place. If the appeal is denied, then we expect to litigate the issue. We’re now coordinating all those efforts with other groups that kindly have offered to support us.
All in all, the refusal by the Court and the Senate to credential us have always seemed strange. No one seems to doubt that we are a journalistic entity and that we serve a public function. Winning the Peabody and other awards would seem to confirm that. And the Court for years has functionally recognized us, because obviously the overwhelming majority of Lyle’s work is for us. We do not want any kind of special treatment. Credentialing the blog doesn’t give us any special power or recognition; it just makes our jobs incrementally easier. All in all, it doesn’t seem to make sense to impose burdens on us that are greater than those that apply to others who fundamentally do the same thing.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: journalism, journalists, press pass, scotusblog, senate, supreme court
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
route around the nonsense
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: route around the nonsense
Of course, such an application might go either way. Is the membership of the Press Club so entrenched that they might deny just a blog? Or are enough of them former Credentialed Press members whom now blog, to see the value.
Next up: Where to draw the line between...let's call it recognized journalism, whether it's a one person blog or a media empire, and LOLCATS.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The government only gives special treatment to those that
A: Paint it in a positive light.
B: Offer politicians campaign contributions and revolving door favors.
The whole 'process' to acquire them is nothing but a smoke screen to cover up the true nature behind them.
I agree, the government should not give special treatment. They should be equally open and transparent to all and treatment should be based on what's in the public interest and not in the personal interests of politicians. Yet, when it comes to negotiations, they give special treatment to industry interests allowing them to attend while keeping the public out. They give mainstream media outlets special treatment by granting them broadcasting and cableco monopolies. and this system of special treatments needs to end. The government needs to base its treatment on the public interest.
Press passes to government functions shouldn't be granted as an opportunity for the media outlets that do get them to exploit their limited nature for profit. They shouldn't be granted based on what entities paint the government in the best light. They should be granted based on what serves the public interest.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What does a press pass give you?
I'm speaking out of ignorance, but in an age where every member of the public can be a member of the press, what's the purpose of a press pass?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What does a press pass give you?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What does a press pass give you?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What does a press pass give you?
I was not paying sufficient attention back when I think I saw something like this happen, so I'm not sure how accurate any of this is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Our Supreme Court
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Test of stupid
Idiotic works for me.
Can't have intelligent reporting of the SCOTUS by some 'blog' that goes around winning the Peabody award without proper credentials, can we?
Can't think outside the box-that would take actual thought.
Guess they have to win the Pulitzer to get really noticed, and even then, I wonder if anyone would notice?
What is it with the environment down in Washington, anyway?
I wonder if they have a sign at the city limits that says:
"Please check your brains here. No intelligent thought allowed!"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Test of stupid
Peter King would! /zing
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Curated journalism
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Put the pitchfork away. Put that torch out. The problem is, we're not doing enough to challenge the paranoia and partisanship that created this nonsensical situation in the first place.
When we've persuaded people to let go of that craziness, we'll be able to work together to vote the bums out in 2016. As it is, it's an uphill battle to persuade people to vote 3rd party because they're afraid the OTHER bums will get in and because people swing right when they're scared.
The last thing people we need in office are anti-government zealots who are desperate to throw the baby out with the bathwater in the misguided hope that private enterprises will rush in to save us. They won't. Their purpose is to make a profit. The services rendered are a means to that end.
What we do need is to elect officials who will respect the Constitution and uphold the rule of law. Find out who the candidates running for office are who will do that for us and let's be talking about them in our social media accounts NOW. This will help to build the consensus that will get them elected.
Take responsibility for the governance of this country, is what I'm saying. A violent upheaval in the hope of driving out the incumbents will only make things worse.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
SCOTUS blog
I love the law. So many ways to attack the opposition.
These guys manage to talk about legal matters in a way that an intelligent layman can understand. They should be getting preferential treatment
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: SCOTUS blog
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I find it entertaining
AND build accommodation for AT LEAST 1/10 of 1% of the people to watch and participate in the proceedings..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I find it entertaining
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cockroaches!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why not do an end-run around the system?
But I'm an optimist.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
BTW, can we have body of Justice Scalia preserved like that of Lenin? Somewhere across from Capitol? Future generations deserve it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]