Or does he?
Thank you, Joshua. I agree that Joyce Vance is a source of much helpful legal comment and sanity.
I have to say that I am myself much more comfortable with our cautious and gradualist approach to televising cases. Mind you, it is so helpful to be reminded that in the States it is more a question of a case by case philosophy than we are sometimes tempted to assume.
For a little while now I have been tempted to think of the civil case presided over by Judge Engoron as rather like an “Al Capone” gambit by stopping his malign gallop over tax evasion. It would appear that, should THAT case continue to go they way it is, his enterprises would go belly up together- as we can hope- with his altogether unfounded reputation for business acumen duly exposed for the fiction it is.
On balance and in all humility I also favour the televising of the “Judge Chutkan “ case as long as this less impressive judge can maintain some sort of control over Trump. The “martyr” myth might thereby be watered down for any observers other than those inexorably wedded to Trumpish loyalty and of course the unprincipled chancers after personal and- as we can now finally begin to hope- short term - advantage as “followers.”
As the poet and lawyer activist Pauli Murray put it, “Hope is a song from a weary throat.”