In Maryland v. Craig, the U.S. Supreme Court reviewed the State's use of a law which seemed to permit a 6-year-old child to testify at trial via one-way closed-circuit television. The Court ruled that the State can, based on a case-specific finding of necessity, abridge the defendant's right to literally and personally confront his accuser. After reviewing the procedural history of the decision and analyzing the constitutional issues at stake, the author concludes that the criminal justice system has the responsibility to balance the rights of the accused with the need for justice for those who lack the personal power to redress their wrongs. Because children comprise such a group, the courts should be allowed to empower them by encouraging their testimonial participation in the trial process. However, the use of technological innovations, including closed-circuit television, should be held as a last resort for use only after the more traditional and less radical alternatives have been exhausted. 306 notes