Northern District of Georgia Turns to Zoom as Proceedings Go Remote
It took a pandemic to do it, but a policy that for years barred visual or audio recording devices from the federal courthouse in downtown Atlanta without a court order and prohibited live broadcasts of court proceedings has been loosened to allow remote access.
May 06, 2020 at 03:36 PM
5 minute read
The COVID-19 pandemic has precipitated a singular and dramatic change at the federal courthouse in downtown Atlanta.
Long-established policies created by the Judicial Conference of the United States and adopted by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia barred visual or audio recording devices and live broadcasts from the downtown Atlanta courthouse without a court order. Those have now been loosened due to the pandemic.
Federal judges in Atlanta, Rome, Gainesville and Newnan may now use Zoom and other technology to conduct public hearings in real time without bringing everyone into the courtroom.
Any recording—including audio, video, or still screen shots—of Zoom proceedings is prohibited, and anyone doing so is subject to sanctions, said Chief Judge Thomas Thrash. "There is to be only one record of a proceedings in federal court," he said. "If you start letting people record and re-transmit bits and pieces of court proceedings, that will be a disaster."
A longtime ban prohibiting the public from bringing electronic devices into district courthouses without an order also remains in force, and traditional radio and television broadcasting is still barred, said Kevin Weimer, the district's chief deputy clerk.
The Northern District isn't alone in adapting to the pandemic by turning to technology like Zoom. Last month, the Supreme Court of Georgia instituted oral arguments via Zoom. The Georgia Court of Appeals followed suit on Wednesday with Chief Judge Stephen Dillard presiding in the courtroom at the downtown Judicial Center while Judges Brian Rickman and Trent Brown and counsel joined in remotely.
On Monday, even the U.S. Supreme Court dipped into remote waters as the highest court in the land for the first time in its history. Still camera-shy, the justices heard oral arguments by telephone with real time public access to the audio.
Videoconferencing in the Northern District isn't unprecedented, but it has largely been inaccessible to all but a few participants, Thrash said.
The 2020 Coronavirus Aid Relief and Economic Security Act changed all that, he explained. The emergency legislation loosened the traditional ban on remote public access to federal court proceedings and offered judges the opportunity to conduct court business at a time when health and safety concerns made court hearings potentially inaccessible.
Just don't get used to it, the chief judge said. In an April 16 court order inaugurating the practice, the judge said that wide use of video conferencing with attendant public access "is intended to be temporary" and will expire once the Judicial Conference decides that current emergency operating conditions are no longer warranted.
|Northern District Extends Jury Trial Suspensions
|- On Friday, U.S. District Chief Judge Thomas Thrash issued an order continuing the suspension of civil and criminal jury trials, grand jury proceedings and jury summonses in the Northern District of Georgia through May 29.
Thrash said he has left it up to each judge to decide to what extent they want to use Zoom. All courtroom deputies have been trained in using Zoom and can now serve as hosts for each judge.
Thrash said he used Zoom to accept a guilty plea last week.
District Judge Steve Jones has also turned to Zoom after his inaugural effort to allow the public to listen in on a teleconference hearing was repeatedly disrupted by unruly members of the public who failed to mute their phones.
The Zoom hearing went better. During a second civil challenge to the state's gun law, Jones heard from nine attorneys while members of the public were muted by his courtroom deputy. Jones was at home but wore his robe. "I wanted it to be just like in court," he said.
"I feel like everything I could have gotten in the courtroom, I got off Zoom," he said.
Weimer said that anyone who is disruptive also can be disconnected from a Zoom proceeding, just as a bailiff would remove an unruly observer from a courtroom.
District Judge Mark Cohen also holds hearings via Zoom, including sentencings, which he said are now feasible because Zoom allows him to see a defendant. "I need to see the defendant … to determine the plea is voluntary," he said. "If I just hear him over the phone, I can't make the right, credible determination."
"I want the defendant to see and hear me," Cohen added. "That's why Zoom is a situation that lends itself to criminal proceedings."
Cohen also said that Zoom has a function that allows lawyers and their clients to conference privately during a Zoom session.
"I think it is great to have this technology available," he said. "It allows us not to put off some of criminal proceedings that should be heard sooner rather than later."
This article has been updated to clarify that the longtime courthouse ban on traditional radio and television broadcasting remains in force.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrump's Lawyers Speak Out: 'The President Had the Confidence to Retain Me'
Trump Election-Interference Prosecution Appears on Course to Wind Down
4 minute readBig Law Practice Leaders 'Bullish' That Second Trump Presidency Will Be Good for Business
3 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250