Public perceptions of remote courts and equal access: who prefers remote video proceedings and why?

Abstract

ABSTRACT The pivot to remote hearings and trials (‘remote courts’) during the COVID-19 pandemic amplified the ongoing debate about the equity and efficacy of court proceedings held over videoconferencing software. Yet, little research has studied public attitudes about remote court despite the relationship between public opinion and court legitimacy. This study helps fill that gap by surveying public attitudes about remote courts, including who prefers remote courts to traditional in-person proceedings and why they prefer them. Our findings reveal that modality preferences are influenced by perception of which modality best enables active participation in court. For example, respondents who preferred remote proceedings often emphasised that the remote option decreases barriers to court participation. They were also more likely to perceive them as equally accessible to people of all races, ethnicities, classes, and nationalities. Finally, our findings show that court modality preferences (remote v. in-person) fall sharply along racial and ethnic lines. Racially marginalised groups indicated a stronger preference than Whites, and respondents identifying as Hispanic showed a stronger preference than those identifying as non-Hispanic. This article concludes with how policymakers can utilise technology to reduce court access barriers while also addressing concerns about remote modalities.