Washington (AFP)

The United States Supreme Court held a live, telephone hearing on Monday for the first time in its history, a small revolution to which the venerable institution was forced by the pandemic of new coronavirus.

"Look, see, see". The clerk of the high court pronounced the usual formula to open this extraordinary session which, with the exception of rare seconds of white and crackling, took place smoothly.

Instead of their usual broken-in exchanges, his magistrates took the floor in turn according to their seniority. And even Justice Clarence Thomas, known for his silence, asked the lawyers for the parties four questions, unprecedented talkative.

With the exception of a "hello anyway!", Launched by the progressive Stephen Breyer, the nine wise men did not allude to the exceptional format of their exchanges, devoted to the hotel reservation service booking.com.

The company asked to register his name in the trademark register, which the authorities refused him on the grounds that the term "booking" is too broad. This would give them a quasi-monopoly position, argued government lawyer Erica Ross. "Booking" and "com" are two generic terms and give the company a "low" advantage, said company lawyer Lisa Blatt.

It is an "internet age" case that obliges the Court to consider one of its previous decisions dating from the 19th century and a law from the 20th century, said conservative magistrate Samuel Alito.

It was therefore particularly appropriate for the technological leap made by the Court, which until now had firmly refused to let the public follow its proceedings live.

- "Pass me on the body" -

In the "before coronavirus" world, you had to wait for hours in front of the neoclassical building, located opposite the Congress in Washington, to hope to win one of the 200 or so seats reserved for the public.

Inside the courtroom, electronic equipment was banned and journalists could not report on the proceedings before their conclusion. As for the official recordings of the discussions, only audio, they were not put online until later.

Despite numerous calls for reform, the Supreme Court had always refused microphones and cameras, explaining that it did not want to give too much importance to hearings that ultimately weigh relatively little in its decisions compared to the written arguments. "It would pass me on the body," had even launched the former magistrate David Souter.

But the high court did not escape the upheavals caused by the Covid-19 pandemic which, in the United States, left nearly 68,000 dead.

In mid-March, it closed its doors to visitors and adopted telework to protect its magistrates who count two particularly vulnerable 80-year-olds, including the dean Ruth Bader Ginsburg, 87 years old.

It then decided to examine ten files by telephone and to authorize the live re-broadcast of its exchanges on television and radio channels.

- Trump taxes -

For this exceptional session, the magistrates did not give in on the cameras and intervened by telephone. Conservative judge Samuel Alito had indicated before the hearing that he intended to take the opportunity to abandon his black dress, but for the rest, they maintained the usual formalities.

To avoid confusion, the head of the court, John Roberts, worked to distribute the floor and the televisions displayed photos and the names of the speakers as they spoke. After an hour and a quarter, barely late, a short blow of the hammer meant the end of the debates.

The magistrates will renew the exercise nine times during the next fortnight. The most anticipated file, May 12, relates to the declarations of taxes of Donald Trump that the republican president refuses to deliver to the Congress and a judge of New York.

The Court will then issue a series of decisions, normally by the end of June, before taking its traditional summer vacation. It remains to be seen whether it will accept the live again next fall.

© 2020 AFP