The best part about the oral argument in New Hampshire's Supreme Court case yesterday was that anyone could hear it. What a concept.

For only the 10th time, the Supreme Court allowed C-SPAN to record the give-and-take between the lawyers and the judges. Then, minutes after the court session ended, C-SPAN played the audio recording on television and made it available on the Internet.

Imagine! Anyone with an interest in how the nation's highest court was addressing the meaning and application of the Constitution could actually listen to the proceedings.

Not that it matters why one wants to listen. Maybe the topic particularly interests you. Maybe you want to hear for yourself just how much of an "umpire" the new chief justice is. Maybe you just like the sound of David Souter's accent.

The bottom line is the court should make recordings of all its cases available. It's ridiculous -and antidemocratic - not to.

The presence of one recording device does nothing to disturb the justices or the advocates. Nor should the prospect of having a tape released immediately, rather than months hence, inhibit the performance of the participants.

On the other hand, the public's understanding of the American legal system will increase dramatically with the chance to hear - if not see - the Supreme Court in action.

Monitor editorial