I think the court made exactly the right decision on television. We did a three-year pilot study of television in federal trial and appellate courts, in trial courts it was a very serious problem, but we're here today talking about appellate courts. We found that the content and emphasis of questions, both by the court and the presentations by the lawyers, was affected by the presence of television. And to understand this, you have to understand something about the dynamic of the oral argument process. The oral argument process is very intense, rigorous.
Judges play devil's advocate.
Sometimes you even deride a counsel's argument so as to bring him or her out and to test the argument. You do it to both sides. The problem with televising arguments is that they can be edited, and if the public sees me giving a rough time to one lawyer, they think I'm biased. I don't think so. Forty-eight states now allow television of appellate proceedings in their courts.