High court to adopt electronic filing of cases

The Supreme Court is belatedly developing an electronic filing system similar to those used in courts around the country, Chief Justice John Roberts said Wednesday in his annual end-of-year report.

Roberts devoted his 10th report as chief justice to discussing the court's wary embrace of information technology over the years, which he attributed in part to the judiciary's role as neutral arbiters of a justice system that must be open to all.

Roberts said that "courts will always be prudent whenever it comes to embracing the 'next big thing.'"

The chief justice talked about the pneumatic tubes that were on the cutting edge of technology in the late 1800s, but not used by the court until its new building opened in 1935. Roberts did not once mention cameras, which are barred from the court's proceedings.

The court's new filing system could be up and running as soon as 2016, although parties in the court's cases will continue to be required to submit paper copies of every brief, Roberts said.

Sen. Patrick Leahy, the Vermont Democrat who is the outgoing chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said the court should be doing more to allow the public to have meaningful access to the justices' work. "Not mentioned in his report, however, is the failure of the Supreme Court to allow even old technology, like photographs of the Supreme Court in session or live streaming of its oral arguments online," Leahy said.

Sen. Chuck Grassley, the Iowa Republican who is about to become chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said the court needs to do more to make its activities accessible to the public.

Appeals court won't delay or move Tsarnaev trial

The trial of marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev can begin as scheduled Monday in Boston after a federal appeals court ruled that the defense had not met the "extraordinary" standard required to justify its intervention.

The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals announced its decision Saturday. Tsarnaev's lawyer had asked the court to delay the trial and move it out of Massachusetts, saying he couldn't get a fair trial in a place where so many were affected by the bombings.

The appeals court ruled 2-1 to avoid intervening in the trial's timing and location.

"The judges in the majority are satisfied that full consideration has been given to the issues raised by the petition, and it is clear that the petition falls short of meeting the requirements for issuing the extraordinary writ of mandamus," two judges said in the majority opinion. One judge dissented, saying he didn't have enough time to carefully consider the petition filed Wednesday.

One of Tsarnaev's attorneys, Miriam Conrad, declined to comment Saturday.

Tsarnaev has pleaded not guilty to 30 charges connected to the April 2013 explosions that killed three people and wounded more than 260 others. Some of the charges carry the death penalty.