| Chapter
7
Covering the
Courts
By Maurice
Possley
Federal
Courts
Under Article III of the U.S. Constitution, the federal court system was organized
in a series of geographical jurisdictions. There are 94 federal judicial districts,
including at least one in every state, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico,
Guam, the Virgin Islands and the Northern Mariana Islands. Again, this is where
most court reporters will do the majority of their work.
These 94 districts are organized into 12 regional circuits. Within
each circuit are federal district judges, federal magistrates and
bankruptcy judges.
Federal magistrates are appointed by the judges of each district
court to perform a broad range of judicial duties. Their primary
role is to provide assistance to district judges by conducting
pretrial hearings and conferences in civil and criminal cases.
By consent of litigants, magistrates may preside at civil trials
and conduct trials involving misdemeanors. Additionally, magistrates
hold criminal arraignments, issue search and arrest warrants, and
determine conditions of bail.
Each federal circuit has a United States Court of Appeals. An
appellate court hears appeals from the district courts located
within its circuit, as well as appeals from decisions of federal
administrative agencies. The federal courts of appeals usually
review cases in three judge panels. Parties to the case have the
right to ask the full appeals court to review the matter, but the
court is not obligated to do so. When the court sits in full, it
is said to be sitting “en banc.” The federal courts
of appeals are the final courts for more than 25,000 cases annually.
Sitting atop both the federal and state court systems is the U.S.
Supreme Court, the true final stop on the judicial highway. The
Supreme Court consists of the Chief Justice of the United States
and eight associate justices. At its discretion, and within certain
guidelines established by Congress, the Supreme Court each year
hears a limited number of the cases—about 80. These cases
may begin in the federal or state courts, and they usually involve
important questions about the U.S. Constitution or federal law.
The court receives thousands of petitions each year for oral arguments
and the justices must rely on summaries provided to them by their
law clerks. If four justices agree to hear the case, it is put
on the court calendar for argument. The cases it accepts must ordinarily
pose substantial issues of law or policy. Most of the cases come
to the Supreme Court through a process called a petition for certiorari,
commonly called “cert.” Refusing to grant “cert” means
it will not hear the case.
Within these various court systems are two groups of players.
One group consists of administrative personnel who handle paperwork,
transcribe proceedings, and maintain order in the courtrooms. The
other group includes the judges and juries who make decisions and
the lawyers who file lawsuits and bring criminal charges. The journalist
who learns and understands the functions and responsibilities of
the players is well on the way to efficient coverage of the court
beat.
Covering The Beat
Reporting in a courthouse can be intimidating. Access to one’s sources—judges,
defense lawyers, prosecutors, clerks, investigators, as well as plaintiffs,
defendants, and witnesses—is not always easily obtained. When court is
in session, a reporter is reduced to the status of an observer with no right
to interject questions or approach individuals for interviews. But at the same
time, court proceedings are where much of your news is generated as it unfolds
in front of you. A good court reporter is part historian, part critic, part
transcriber, part observer—and always a good listener, accurate note
taker and critical thinker. It is fair to think of covering a court proceeding
like covering a sporting event. It is a contest with a winner and a loser.
They are public events. There are rules of engagement. A successful reporter
understands the rules, the players, and the stakes.
Be patient. Covering the court beat will require, at times, spending
substantial time just sitting and waiting. You will wait for judges
to finish their motion call before a trial begins or resumes. You
will wait for untold numbers of cases to be called and heard before
the case you are interested in is finally called before the judge.
You will wait during jury deliberations. You will sit in courtrooms
that are too hot, too cold or too stuffy as a witness in a trial
that is non-essential to a story, but essential to a case, is questioned
and cross-examined for hours. It is essential that you develop
a sixth sense that tells you when to drop out of a courtroom without
missing crucial news if your responsibilities—as they often
do—extend beyond a single case.
Become knowledgeable. Any reporter destined to spend time on a
court beat quickly realizes that one of the most difficult challenges
is converting the legal machinations that unfold in court or within
the pages of legal briefs into language that the reader or listener
can understand. Turning legalese into English is frequently difficult
because the language of the law is extremely precise and often
just plain convoluted. Many reporters make the mistake of bringing
a lack of knowledge and oversimplifying matters with the result
that their reports mislead or misinform the public. Sometimes it
is simply laziness—an unwillingness to do the necessary background
reporting to understand a legal issue—that leads to uninformative
or erroneous journalism. So, whether you are in for a day, a week,
a month, or the long haul, consider what sort of legal background
you need to acquire to ensure your reports are accurate. For that
reason, a reporter should develop a bank of knowledgeable sources
in the law that can be located rather easily in deadline situations.
These are men and women with considerable legal knowledge either
broadly or in specific disciplines and whose opinions and explanations
can be trusted as unbiased and honest. The reporter who comes to
the beat with little or no legal training or education must develop
these sorts of touchstone sources to keep their reports accurate
and to avoid being victimized by legal spin. You also need reliable
reference sources, such as Blacks Law Dictionary.
Be observant
What happens in the courtroom is more than just men and women speaking words.
Particularly in those jurisdictions where cameras are not allowed in the
courtroom, you are not just the ears, but the eyes of your readers or listeners.
While there is no real substitute for using “said” or “testified” or “told
the judge/jury” when you are quoting a witness/prosecutor/defense attorney,
secondarily there are ways to convey the demeanor and attitude of witnesses
that enliven reports of proceedings. Be descriptive. Bring your audience
into the courtroom. Did the lawyer pace during questioning? Did the witness
redden, weep, laugh, or frown? Did the judge admonish in a quiet or sarcastic
manner or with a thunderous bellow? Used sparingly, this type of description
makes for engaging and lively reporting. After all, jurors pick up on these
sorts of things. There is no reason the reporter should produce a flat account
stripped of human emotion or description.
Continue
to the next page in "Chapter 7: Covering the Courts" >>>
<<< Return to the previous page in "Chapter
7: Covering the Courts"
|
