Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer to retire

[aygart]

Another person that seems to not understand the constitution.

You are the only one who mentioned the constitution regarding cameras.

[neveryou]

Someone needs to understand the constitution.
The highest court in the land does not have cameras.

You liberals just don't care how your actions have consequences. You started the politicized hearings, when the Republicans do it back to you (they attacked her record and how she can't define woman) now you start crying.

Voters should get to see who their elected officials are nominating for the Supreme Court

You are dangerous, you want mandates to lock every body down. Mandates to force vaccinate. Mandates to ban gas and oil. Mandates that everybody buy an electric vehicle. Not let us watch what are elected officials are doing/debating.

[CountValentine]

You are the only one who mentioned the constitution regarding cameras.

Ok and?

[aygart]

Ok and?

How does anything anyone said that has nothing to do with the constitution show anything about their knowledge of the constitution?

[neveryou]

Someone needs to understand the constitution.

How does the 10 ammendment go along with all of your views?

You are the wrong person to be lecturing about the constitution

[CountValentine]

You liberals just don't care how your actions have consequences. You started the politicized hearings, when the Republicans do it back to you (they attacked her record and how she can't define woman) now you start crying.

Blame the liberals for everything. 

[aygart]

Another person that seems to not understand the constitution.

You think the hearings are in the court?

[CountValentine]

You think the hearings are in the court?

I think you shouldn't put ketchup on eggs. What does either have to do with what I said.
Are you trying to say the constitution allows for no cameras in court but not hearings?

[aygart]

I think you shouldn't put ketchup on eggs. What does either have to do with what I said.
Are you trying to say the constitution allows for no cameras in court but not hearings?

The constitution does not require cameras anywhere. What does that have to do with anything?

[CountValentine]

The constitution does not require cameras anywhere. What does that have to do with anything?

Right, because that's what we do in a free society

That is what I was addressing. Not having cameras does not mean we are not a free society.
Free does not mean do anything you want.

[aygart]

That is what I was addressing. Not having cameras does not mean we are not a free society.
Free does not mean do anything you want.

But what do cameras in court have to do with anything

[aygart]

That is what I was addressing. Not having cameras does not mean we are not a free society.
Free does not mean do anything you want.

What does your disagreement with him and both sides of the aisle in congress about what is appropriate in a representative democracy have to do with knowledge of the constitution?

[CountValentine]

What does your disagreement with him and both sides of the aisle in congress about what is appropriate in a representative democracy have to do with knowledge of the constitution?

His comment suggested not having cameras is equal to not a free society.
He can clarify if he wants.
My point was according to our constitution you are allowed to ban cameras in certain situations if not most.

[aygart]

His comment suggested not having cameras is equal to not a free society.
He can clarify if he wants.
My point was according to our constitution you are allowed to ban cameras in certain situations if not most.

You seemingly made the same accusation about me but I still don't see where you drew the line to the constitution.

[CountValentine]

You seemingly made the same accusation about me but I still don't see where you drew the line to the constitution.

He can clarify what he meant before we go another ten pages on it.

I took it to mean in a free society we allow cameras.

[aygart]

He can clarify what he meant before we go another ten pages on it.

I took it to mean in a free society we allow cameras.

We should

[CountValentine]

We should

Ok but my point is SCOTUS has had cases about cameras. Not having cameras is allowed and doesn't mean we are not a free society. SCOTUS has actually overturned decisions because there was cameras.

[jj1000]

The highest court in the land does not have cameras.

C'mon.

You don't see the difference between congress having cameras when they create laws and approve nominees than lifetime appointed judges interpreting the laws?

Of course congress should be televised on camera as much as possible within the confines of national security.

[CountValentine]

C'mon.

You don't see the difference between congress having cameras when they create laws and approve nominees than lifetime appointed judges interpreting the laws?

Of course congress should be televised on camera as much as possible within the confines of national security.

You have a written record and audio. The cameras are producing to much theater. Blame what ever side you want but IMHO they should go.

[jj1000]

You have a written record and audio. The cameras are producing to much theater. Blame what ever side you want but IMHO they should go.

Based on that view I would say you are pro limiting access, in essence.

Many voters aren't reading or listening to these things after the fact, but the  47 million adults who regularly watch C-SPAN do watch it, live.

It's very dangerous waters you are chartering IMO.