Inside the Supreme Court: A Journalist’s Experience with No Electronics Allowed
Entering the hallowed halls of the Supreme Court is a unique and humbling experience for any journalist. Unlike the campaign events and press conferences that we are used to covering, the Supreme Court has a strict no electronics policy. No laptops, no cellphones, just pen and paper. It’s a stark contrast to the digital age we live in, but it adds an air of reverence to the proceedings.
As I stepped into the courtroom, I couldn’t help but notice the absence of any electronic devices. It was an odd sight, seeing rows of journalists armed only with their pens and notepads. The silence in the room was almost deafening, broken only by the sound of keys jingling or papers shuffling. I quickly realized that even the smallest sounds carried weight in this solemn space.
Finding a seat in the press area was not as easy as I had imagined. Rows F and G were partially obstructed by marble columns adorned with red curtains and gold trim. Peering between the columns, I caught glimpses of the courtroom. From my seat in G-1, I had a nearly perpendicular view of the justices. I could see Amy Coney Barrett, Neil Gorsuch, Clarence Thomas, and Brett Kavanaugh clearly, while Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson were a little harder to spot. To get a better view, I had to sit up tall or subtly shift my head to the left.
However, it didn’t take long for me to realize that changing seats or leaning for a better glimpse was strictly prohibited. The staff monitoring the press area made sure of that. When I tried to move my chair just an inch to get a better angle, I was promptly asked to shift it back. The rules were clear: once you’re seated, you stay put.
Despite the strict atmosphere, there were moments of levity in the high court. The justices, known for their brilliance and wit, occasionally made comments that elicited laughter from the audience. One such moment occurred during an exchange between Trump attorney Jonathan Mitchell and Justice Elena Kagan. Mitchell acknowledged a point made by Kagan, to which she humorously interjected, “Then I must be right.” The room erupted in laughter, momentarily breaking the serious tone that usually pervades the Supreme Court.
Another instance of laughter came when Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was discussing a point about the officer/office debate. Justice Kagan jumped in with a question about the order of specific questions, causing a bit of confusion. Chief Justice Roberts quickly diffused the situation, reassuring everyone that there would be an opportunity to address the officer stuff. Laughter filled the room once again, showing that even in this solemn setting, moments of lightheartedness can arise.
While the Supreme Court demands silence and strict adherence to its rules, it is not without its moments of humanity and humor. As a journalist, being present in the courtroom is a rare privilege. It allows us to witness history unfolding, to see the justices up close and personal, and to experience the unique dynamics that exist within the highest court in the land.
Leaving the courtroom after the arguments were submitted, I couldn’t help but reflect on the significance of this experience. The Supreme Court, with its strict no electronics policy and its unwavering commitment to justice, stands as a symbol of our democracy and the importance of impartiality. It is a place where arguments are heard, decisions are made, and the future of our nation is shaped. As a journalist, I am grateful for the opportunity to have been a part of it, if only for a brief moment in time.
