The Judicial Conference, a policymaking body, announced on Tuesday that it will limit audio streaming access to federal court proceedings following the end of pandemic-era policies. This decision comes as a response to the increased virtual access to federal courts during the pandemic.

Before the Covid-19 pandemic, federal courts prohibited all remote public access to proceedings. However, the need for remote work during the pandemic led the judiciary to temporarily amend its longstanding policy. These changes were set to end on Sept. 21.

New Policies

The Judicial Conference announced that courts will be able to continue broadcasting audio from civil and bankruptcy proceedings, with the exception of trial proceedings with witness testimony. This policy change was announced during a call with reporters following the body’s biennial meeting.

Media organizations and court watchers had asked the conference to include civil proceedings with witness testimony in its revised policy. They argued that allowing greater audio access in these proceedings would act as a supplement to in-person access, allowing those from all over the country to tune in. “This access would improve public understanding of and trust in the judicial system,” the groups wrote.

The conference said it would explore more ways to expand audio access to witness testimony. However, it still has concerns over whether broadcasting witness testimony would increase the potential for witness intimidation or complicate witness sequestration.

Impact of Audio Broadcasting in Court Proceedings

The impact of audio broadcasting in court proceedings has been significant. The right to broadcast court cases has been confirmed by the Constitution in order to facilitate open justice and the right of the public to hear and see what goes on in our courts. The presence of cameras in court is now considered a general rule and not an exception.

Public opinion on court audio broadcasting has been largely positive. The fact that so many district courts successfully provided remote audio access to proceedings, including those with witnesses, shows that logistical concerns about permitting remote audio access can be readily addressed. The groups argued allowing greater audio access in these proceedings would act as a supplement to in-person access, allowing those from all over the country to tune in. This access would improve public understanding of and trust in the judicial system.