Editorial: A new court policy?

Tuesday, Jan. 2, 2007 | 7:13 a.m.

The U.S. Supreme Court is the ivory tower of ivory towers - justices have lifetime appointments and their job is to issue the final ruling in any case they hear.

Aloof? Absolutely. It adds to the court's mystique and its reputation. The rule barring cameras in the building has allowed justices to work in relative anonymity, and that has suited the justices just fine.

When they have appeared in public, it has mainly been limited to the dowdy C-SPAN or the occasional after-dinner speech. Their comments, with the exception of outspoken Justice Antonin Scalia, have typically been tempered.

Chief Justice John Roberts, though, is changing the image of the court. He has been more open and accessible to the media than his predecessors, showing up on the television news program "Nightline," and his associates have been more willing to speak publicly on their views about the courts, as Scalia and Justice Stephen Breyer did last year debating their views of the Constitution.

It is a remarkable and welcome change as the justices are providing a better glimpse into the workings of a court that is often inscrutable.

The move is partly due, legal experts say, to Roberts' desire to have the court issue narrower decisions and find more consensus on rulings.

That has already gotten justices wagging their tongues. Breyer and Scalia have said they do not necessarily agree with the need for greater consensus on the court, and Scalia is not a fan of narrow rulings; he prefers bold rulings that guide the legal system.

Whether by consensus or not, the court's role is to settle critical legal issues and make opinions that can be clearly understood by lower courts.

The danger of justices taking a bigger public role is that they may feel the pressure of public opinion, influencing decisions that should be made on their constitutional merits. Otherwise, the new public face of the courts is encouraging. The court's rulings on hot-button issues over the decades - such as segregation, abortion and school prayer - show the impact the relatively unknown justices have on society.

There are more of those types of divisive cases in the judicial system, and the court would do well to give people a greater understanding of its work. While the court hasn't faced the same type of public cynicism as the other branches of government, the justices, by being more open, can work toward further building its credibility and the public trust in the system.