You can listen to a recording of the oral arguments in the case of Greece v. Galloway about the role of prayer at official government functions. Listening to the arguments is a different experience from reading the transcript because you can pick up nuances such as asides, sarcasm, and jokes.
This site is done well in that they have a rolling transcript alongside the sound, along with a photo of the speaker. That helps because there are so many people involved and often interruptions and cross talk, so just sound would be hard to follow.
Thomas G. Hungar, the lawyer for the city and Ian H. Gershengorn for the Obama administration had a total of 30 minutes to make the case for allowing the prayer practice while Douglas Laycock appeared for the two women challenging it.
In listening to the arguments, I found chief justice Roberts and justice Scalia asked the most penetrating questions of Hungar, especially on why tradition and history practice should validate a practice, which was one of the key pieces of reasoning on which the 1983 March v. Chambers case was decided.
It also appeared that Stephen Breyer hinted (beginning at around the 16:45 minute mark) that he was a nonbeliever by joking that he would privately answer Scalia’s questions about what would be the equivalent of prayer for someone who is not religious, that was accompanied by laughter in the court.