Column: Keep cameras out of the Supreme Court  The Supreme Court
offers the last public venue in Washington where there can be
serious, uninterrupted, give-and-take on controversial issues
because no television or still cameras are allowed.  It has to
stay that way.  That was my first reaction Wednesday after the
court's two hours of oral argument over the constitutionality of
the Defense of Marriage Act. I have regularly gone to listen to
arguments in the court over the past 30 years, often to hear my
son who has argued 23 times before the court and often since I
got a law degree a dozen years ago.  Wednesday, I was among the
lucky 400 or so with a ticket.  There has been an argument for
years that the public has been blocked from witnessing the court
in action and that allowing television cameras in "would be a
terrific thing," as one TV commentator said Thursday.  The
loudest voices for bringing in the cameras mostly come from the
news media, particularly those with TV networks or stations.
But television