Suspense And Controversy Surrounding Trump's Trials: To Be Or Not To Be...TELEVISED

Written by Published

The policymaking body of the federal judiciary has recently updated its rules, confirming that criminal trials, including those of former President Donald Trump, will not be broadcast live.

The updated rules now allow judges to provide a live audio stream for certain proceedings in civil and bankruptcy cases, but not for criminal proceedings. This decision follows a request made by 36 House Democrats to televise Trump's trials.

In a letter dated August 3, California Representative Adam Schiff and his colleagues expressed their belief that the historic nature of the charges against Trump warranted televised proceedings. They argued that it was crucial for the public to witness the trials firsthand in order to fully accept the outcome, understand the conduct of the trials, evaluate the strength of the evidence, and assess the credibility of witnesses.

While the updated rules by the Judicial Conference of the United States expand public access to federal court proceedings, they still maintain the prohibition on livestreaming criminal trials, despite the calls for transparency in Trump's cases.

However, there may be an exception in Trump's Georgia racketeering case, as Judge Scott McAfee of the Fulton County Superior Court issued an order on August 24th permitting a live broadcast of court proceedings.

Trump's attorneys have expressed differing opinions on the matter. In his New York case, they argued against cameras, claiming it would create a "circus-like atmosphere."

On the other hand, John Lauro, Trump's attorney in the Washington, D.C. 2020 election subversion case, expressed his support for live coverage, stating that it would allow "the American people to see the truth."