A groundbreaking endeavor is underway to bridge the gap between the U.S. Supreme Court's traditional practices and public accessibility. Spearheaded by Professor Jerry Goldman of Northwestern University, the 'On The Docket' project harnesses artificial intelligence to breathe new life into Supreme Court decision announcements. By generating visual avatars of justices speaking their actual words, the initiative seeks to make these historically private moments publicly available and more engaging, ultimately enhancing transparency in the judicial process.
For decades, the Supreme Court has operated with a strong emphasis on tradition, often exhibiting resistance to rapid modernization. Despite this, a significant shift is now occurring as AI-generated portrayals of the justices are set to deliver their decisions. These digital renditions, or 'avatars,' articulate the very pronouncements made in court, which, until now, were largely confined to the ears of those physically present in the courtroom. This development marks a pivotal moment in how the public can engage with the highest judicial body.
Professor Goldman's long-standing commitment to increasing public access to the Supreme Court dates back to 1996 with the launch of his nonprofit project, Oyez. This pioneering online platform aimed to archive and provide audio recordings of the court's oral arguments and opinion announcements, reaching back to 1955 when such proceedings began to be taped. The Oyez project was revolutionary, particularly given the previous lack of public awareness regarding these recordings and the inconsistent preservation of many early tapes.
Historically, access to these invaluable audio recordings was severely restricted, often not becoming available until many months after a case had been heard and decided. The public would typically have to wait until the commencement of the subsequent court term to access the audio from the previous one. This protracted delay limited immediate public understanding and engagement with pivotal legal decisions.
A significant change occurred in 2020, compelled by the COVID-19 pandemic, when the court was forced to permit live broadcasts of all oral arguments. Justices participated remotely via phone lines, allowing the public to listen in real-time. Following the pandemic, the court, without much fanfare, maintained this system, a notable departure from its long-standing reluctance to broadcast arguments live. However, one critical aspect remained under wraps: the immediate announcement of decisions and any accompanying oral dissents.
To this day, the established system continues to restrict access to bench announcements until the subsequent term, meaning only those physically present in the courtroom can witness the immediate unfolding of judicial drama. This limitation has prompted Professor Goldman's team to explore new avenues for making these moments more accessible. Their current experimentation involves using AI to reconstruct not only what was said but also what was seen during these decision announcements, even in the absence of immediate official audio releases.
Professor Goldman firmly believes that since these proceedings are public within the courtroom, they should be public for everyone. The 'On The Docket' team is navigating the technical and ethical complexities of this endeavor. Early attempts with AI-generated visuals presented humorous 'bloopers,' such as justices mysteriously disappearing or engaging in synchronized movements. Through refinement and the use of existing photos and videos of justices, the team has successfully created realistic avatars that mirror the justices' appearances and mannerisms, synchronizing them with actual audio recordings.
Addressing ethical considerations, the team opted for a slightly 'cartoonized' visual style and clear labeling to indicate that the video content is AI-generated, while the audio remains authentic. This ensures viewers can distinguish between real spoken words and their synthetic visual representations. Their initial foray includes a visual rendition of Chief Justice John Roberts' 14-minute summary of a significant 6-to-3 decision concerning former President Trump's immunity, followed by Justice Sonia Sotomayor's 38-minute oral dissent, together offering a compelling and somewhat surreal experience.
This pioneering project is likely to face scrutiny from the Supreme Court, an institution that historically resisted transparency. Past incidents, such as the court's lawsuit against law professor Peter Irons in 1993 for publishing secret recordings of oral arguments, illustrate this resistance. While oral arguments are now routinely broadcast, the immediate access to decision announcements remains elusive. Despite repeated requests from journalists and scholars for live audio broadcasts of these announcements, the court has maintained its silence. Professor Goldman highlights that historical documents from the 1950s suggest no initial intent by justices to keep such recordings secret. Yet, the court's current stance leaves AI as the only viable means to visually interpret these crucial moments, as even artificial intelligence cannot penetrate the institution's enduring silence on live audio access.