An open SCOTUS?

[Salty]

Currently, when the SC justices discuss a decision - it is done in total secrecy.
Not even the law clerks are in the room
During oral augments - No cameras, no tape recorders, ect.

Sen Schumer (D) wants all Federal agys to be transparent - including the SCOTUS.
How about DOD, CIA, FBI, NSA and ect.

So should the SC be more open? Are the alphabets I mentioned - do they have too much info that is classified? Why do you suppose the SCOTUS do not want info flowing out - until a decision is made?

Remember, if you were in the military- to be cleared for classified info:
1) have the proper clearance
2) have a need to know

Currently over 4 million people have some level of clearance - that's about 1.3% of citizens
The clearance must be renewed at least every 10 years.
Security Clearance Levels for Federal Employees

 

[canadyjd]

Currently, when the SC justices discuss a decision - it is done in total secrecy.
Not even the law clerks are in the room
During oral augments - No cameras, no tape recorders, ect.

Sen Schumer (D) wants all Federal agys to be transparent - including the SCOTUS.
How about DOD, CIA, FBI, NSA and ect.

So should the SC be more open? Are the alphabets I mentioned - do they have too much info that is classified? Why do you suppose the SCOTUS do not want info flowing out - until a decision is made?

Remember, if you were in the military- to be cleared for classified info:
1) have the proper clearance
2) have a need to know

Currently over 4 million people have some level of clearance - that's about 1.3% of citizens
The clearance must be renewed at least every 10 years.
Security Clearance Levels for Federal Employees

Even though no cameras, SCOTUS arguments are open to reporters and a few members of the public. The discussions among the Justices should remain closed.

Peace to you

 

[Squire Robertsson]

SCOTUS case discussions are like jury deliberations.