Byron P. answered • 07/30/21
LAW SCHOOL AND BAR EXAM TUTORING WITH REMARKABLE EXAM TECHNIQUES
Though many are urging that Roe v. Wade be fully reversed in a single US Supreme Court ruling, the chance of that happening in a single opinion is low. When topics like abortion are the subject of heated (often partisan) debate, the U.S. Supreme Court typically treads softly. If a majority of the Supreme Court hopes to put an end to a woman's right to an abortion, the Court will do so in a series of opinions- each more restrictive than the last, until (low and behold) the exceptions have eaten up the Rule and Roe is no longer precedential. For example, the Court may shorten the deadlines in which a woman must seek an abortion through several opinions that shorten the deadline and then shorten it some more.
I teach my Law Students and Bar Applicants to view this maneuver as a "chip-away reversal". Other scholars (and, indeed, members of the Court itself) refer to this phenomenon as a "stealth reversal".
Cameras: None of the Federal Courts (Magistrates/Referees to District Court Judges to Circuit Judges to Supreme Court Justices) permit cameras in their courtrooms as a matter of right, though Oral Arguments are recorded and archived. And, appellate briefs and motions are available online at the SCOTUS website. There have been pilot programs to allow cameras in the Federal courthouses in very limited circumstances. It's a moving target. Some express the fear that if Oral Argument is broadcast some Justices (and advocates) may view Oral Argument as an opportunity to "play to the cameras". The allure of the bright lights.
In general, cameras can be employed in State court proceedings, but only with the permission of the Judge(s) overseeing the case. You will recall the O.J. Simpson and the recent George Floyd/Derek Chauvin trials.
