3 ms·

Incredible resource. I feel like this is what proponents of cameras want, a medium for understanding the thought process and types of debate that goes into SCOT

Incredible resource. I feel like this is what proponents of cameras want, a medium for understanding the thought process and types of debate that goes into SCOTUS decisions. There were many interesting observations. Like how there were still interruptions (thus how hard that must be to do away with in oral debate), how there were no “umms or likes” I observed (makes sense, they would be intelligent speakers), and above all how humanizing the occasional joke and laughter were, for decisions that have serious impact.

jskdvsksnb 6y ago
> how there were no “umms or likes” I observed (makes sense, they would be intelligent speakers) Some of the justices get their questions out ... very ... slowly. I don't know if you can necessarily attribute the lack of 'filler words' to some superior intellect. I'm sure the fact they all went to a few ivy league schools also trained them to speak in a particular manner.
remarkEon 6y ago
Oyez is probably a top 5 website out there today. It's beautifully built in its minimalism, and it does an amazing job of mainlining what is an intentionally inaccessible part of the US government to the public. IANAL, but I've listened to and read hundreds of cases from this site, and it's a seriously undervalued resource. Whenever decisions drop in June (aka SCOTUS season), it's one of my favorite summer redoubts - to ignore all the press write-ups about the cases and just go to the source material. Edit: As a testament to how deep this website goes, they've got audio from the 1960s curated in the same way. Here's a famous case (and very very relevant today) from 1963. https://www.oyez.org/cases/1963/39 https://www.oyez.org/cases/1963/39