Abstract
Social workers have an ethical obligation to be aware of and advocate for reform in their communities, and court-watching is one important tool for engaging in judicial oversight. While rights of access grounded in the first amendment grant individuals the right to attend court proceedings in person, in practice, barriers such as employment and transportation prevent widespread attendance and impede judicial oversight. Policies granting access to copies of audio/video recordings of proceedings can mitigate these barriers, but they vary across states and localities. In the State of Michigan, where judges are elected, the Michigan Supreme Court has adopted a policy of permitting individual trial courts to exercise discretion regarding whether to share audio/video recordings with the public, which results in some voters in the state having more access to information regarding their elected judges than others. This study explores the local policies that result from empowering judges to self-determine the degree of transparency they share with the public.
Research Question
The purpose of this study is to describe the variation and frequency in court policies regarding access to audio/video recordings and describe the implications for individuals to be informed in their voting for judges.
Results
More than half (58%) of courts had a score of 0 (they allow no public access to audio/video recordings of public court proceedings), 14% had a score of 1 (they allow viewing/listening on site, but no copies or dissemination), 8% had a score of 2 (they allow copies but forbid dissemination and no viewing/listening on site), 10% had a score of 3 (they allow viewing/listening on site and they allow copies, but forbid dissemination), 3% had a score of 5 (they allow copies and dissemination but no viewing/listening on site), and 7% had a score of 6 (they allow viewing/listening on site, copies and dissemination).
Policy Implications
The ability for the public to obtain and disseminate copies of audio/video recordings of court proceedings is the gold standard for ensuring that voters can access information about their elected judges’ behavior on the bench, and yet only 10% of Michigan courts allow this, raising questions about the Michigan judiciary’s commitment to ethical standards, transparency and service to the public. In contrast, other states including Alaska, Arkansas, Connecticut, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, South Dakota, Tennessee, and Wisconsin have adopted statewide policies mandating public access. A statewide policy that grants the public a presumption of access that this author helped inform was proposed at the State Bar of Michigan Representative Assembly Meeting in April 2024 and did not pass (see QR code). A call for social workers to advocate for this policy to be adopted in states that forbid access is emphasized.
Democratizing Court-Watching in the Digital Age: Exploring Individual Court Policies Regarding Access to Audio/Video Recordings in Michigan
Samantha Hallman, MSW, Ph.D. University of Michigan-Dearborn
Department of Health and Human Services
Meet the Author
Sam Hallman, MSW, Ph.D.
I currently split my time as Lecturer at the University of Michigan-Dearborn, where I teach research methods and statistics in the Department of Health and Human Services, and as a Research Project Lead at the University of Michigan-Ann Arbor in the Center for the Study of Higher and Postsecondary Education Education Policy Research Lab, where I conduct policy-driven research on adult education and prison education.
My research and policy advocacy on public oversight and the democratization of court-watching as a mechanism for judicial accountability grew out of problems with judicial abuse and misconduct in my local community. When I am not teaching, conducting research, or advocating for increased government transparency in Michigan – particularly in our courts – I enjoy reading, exploring the great outdoors in Michigan’s four seasons, and spending time with my husband and two young boys.
Access to Copies of Audio/Video Recordings of Public Court Proceedings Policy Proposal
Method
Data were collected from written policies from 149 courts regarding public access to copies of audio/video recordings of court proceedings. Each court’s policy was scored based on a cumulative point system on three aspects of public access including (a) whether audio/video recordings were accessible for viewing/listening on site (1 point), (b) whether copies could be obtained (2 points) and (c) whether copies could be disseminated (3 points). Total scores range from 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating more access.
Inquiry Justification
The State of Michigan has seen an increase in both formal judicial complaints with the Judicial Tenure Commission (JTC), as well as several examples of judicial abuse that have made local and national headlines but that may not meet the JTC’s standard for public judicial discipline. The JTC’s ability to impartially and speedily dispose of cases has been questioned by both the public and members of the bar, and points to the importance of empowering citizens with the requisite information needed to remove judges via the electoral process.