Resumen de Chandler v. Florida: the Supreme Court's reluctance to endorse televised trials
In CHANDLER V. FLORIDA (1981), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that states may experiment with camera coverage of trials over defendants’ objections. However, the Court refused to ENDORSE televised trials or give broadcasters an UNEQUIVOCAL right to televise trials. In reaching its decision, the Court reviewed empirical research to determine the impacts of NEWS cameras in courtrooms. The bulk of evidence examined by the Court showed no significant correlation between the presence of cameras at trials and perceived prejudicial behavior or attitudes on the part of judges, witnesses, jurors or attorneys. But the Court relied on the relevant research only to a limited degree, frequently circumscribing its decision with reservations about the scientific nature of the data, the validity of its conclusions, and the pervasiveness of its implications. The more apparent rationales for the Court's decision lie in support of federalism, the ability of state judges to protect due process, and the notion of parity between print and broadcast media. Careful reading of the Court's majority opinion shows that CHANDLER offers mixed hopes to broadcasters—the Court was quick to emphasize that future cases may alter its carefully limited decision.
