UC Davis Law professor Vikram David Amar discusses the media's coverage of Supreme Court decisions, particularly focusing on the end-of-term rulings and their interpretation by journalists. Professor Amar argues that many prominent media organizations consistently misrepresent the Court’s actions by drawing incorrect conclusions from decisions not to review cases or dismissals, misinterpreting jurisdictional rulings as judgments on the merits, and making unfounded predictions about case outcomes, thus failing to meet basic standards of accuracy in legal reporting.
Former counsel to president Richard Nixon John W. Dean explains how the flurry of news surrounding President Trump has, if nothing else, improved the quality of journalism. Dean points out that the critical thinking and work of journalists is at least as strong right now as it was during the Watergate scandal and they are admirably digging for truth rather than taking statements at face value.
