A Visit to the Highest Court in the Land....

When our cab pulled around the Capitol and up to the Supreme Court, I looked with dismay at the line that stretched all the way across the plaza and down the street. Thankfully, Professor Locy’s years as a Supreme Court reporter were about to come in handy. Skirting the tourists, protestors and other crowds milling outside the main entrance, she led us in a quiet side door … and right into a scene almost as chaotic as the one outside. Let’s say this about the court: they need a lot of employees just to herd crowds around the building.

We were slated to hear two cases: Summum v. Pleasant Grove, Utah and Bell v. Virginia. The Bell case revolved around a very narrow section of Virginia law. While it was technically a case about the death penalty, it really focused mostly on whether or not poor representation in state court was enough to lead to new hearings in federal court (at least that’s what I think the case was about).

The Summums, however, were a different matter entirely. That case focused on whether or not the City of Pleasant Grove, which allowed the Fraternal Order of the Eagles to put a Ten Commandments monument in a city park, must also allow the Summums – a small sect that combines several faiths – to post a monument of their Seven Aphorisms.

The lawyers for the city went first, but Chief Justice John Roberts interrupted the city’s lawyer with a question before a minute had passed. The frantic pace kept up after that, as every justice but Clarence Thomas piled questions on the city’s lawyer, a member of the U.S. Solicitor General’s Office (who was arguing in favor of the city) and then the church’s attorney. Everyone seemed to have a question, and it was impressive to watch the lawyers manage to keep up with the judges and sometimes answer several questions at once (I’m also amazed that the reporters can write fast enough to keep notes on all of the questions).

When the court is dealing with a technical case like Bell v. Virginia, the courtroom is usually half full and sometimes seems a bit sleepy. That wasn’t the case during the Summum case. The courtroom was packed, and everyone was leaning forward to catch what the justices and lawyers would say next. Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah sat in one of the front rows to see how his constituents would fare.

The justices seemed torn as they debated the case, and I left with no clear idea of who would prevail when the opinion is released. On the one hand, if the monument was really a form of government speech, as Pleasant Grove’s attorneys argued, that might create concerns with the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. But on the other hand, you could tell that the justices worried that a finding in favor of the Summums would open our nation’s parks to a raft of unusual, pointless or even frivolous monuments. The case revolved around terms like “limited public forum,” “government speech” and other items we’d covered in Journalism Law.

The press sits on the side of the courtroom near the front in a series of benches reserved for their use. It was fun to watch them all go careening out of the courtroom after the Summum case ended, leaving behind a half-empty courtroom for the Bell case. When we went down to the pressroom at the conclusion of the arguments, they were all filing their first Web updates for a decision that Chief Justice Roberts had read out at the start of the session. That case involved a suit between the Navy and environmental groups who wanted to restrict the Navy’s ability to use sonar in training exercises near the California coast. The environmentalists argued that the sonar was harmful to marine mammals. The court sided with the Navy, and the Chief Justice finished reading a summary of his opinion at 10:10. The Wall Street Journal had an e-mail alert out by 10:18. Now that’s a quick turnaround.

It seems like the court beat is sometimes a quiet, slower-paced one as reporters work on preview stories, prepare for upcoming cases or read through opinions. But on days like this one, when a major oral argument coincides with an important opinion, the job is full of breaking news. One of the hardest jobs is translating difficult legal arguments into clear, articulate prose that readers can understand even if they don’t have a law degree. That is relatively easy in a case like Summum v. Pleasant Grove or the sonar case, but on other days it can be a difficult task.

There was one wonderful irony in our visit to the court’s pressroom. Inside we met Lyle Denniston, the dean of the press corps and the longest-tenured reporter on the court beat. He wasn’t working for AP, Reuters or a major newspaper, however. Instead, he was the lone reporter in the press room who works for a blog: Scotusblog.com. Maybe veteran reporters can adapt to the brave new world of journalism.