As an expert in the field of judicial technology, I have witnessed firsthand the transformative capabilities that digital platforms bring to courtrooms. The integration of technology has made it easier to file cases online, track proceedings, and manage documents. This drive to improve accessibility and streamline processes has led courts to wholeheartedly adopt technology, reducing the burden on physical infrastructure and minimizing bureaucratic red tape. This has resulted in a more agile and responsive judicial system, particularly in criminal cases where the accurate presentation of evidence and smooth conduct of trials are crucial. Judicial technology services, such as electronic presentation of evidence and advanced information technology systems, have become an integral part of the judicial process.
These services not only improve judicial administration capabilities but also influence the way justice is delivered. In fact, courtrooms in the Southern District of New York are equipped with technology that facilitates court proceedings. This includes remote conferencing, microphones for enhanced audio, and electronic presentation of evidence. While these systems are user-friendly, our courtroom technology department is always available to provide assistance if needed. One of the most significant advancements in judicial technology is real-time transcription.
This technology is now used in the vast majority of complex civil or criminal trials, arbitrations, or public consultations. It was first created in 1993 with the development of LiveNote and is now used in thousands of cases worldwide every day. A notable example is its use in the BCCI hearing, one of the largest civil litigations brought before the courts of England and Wales in the last five years. The parties involved used real-time transcription to order 257 days' worth of minutes, with the software proving to be intelligent and efficient in addressing the problems faced by lawyers, judges, and arbitrators on a daily basis. Another significant development in judicial technology is the use of artificial intelligence (AI).
AI-powered tools can assist in writing legal reports, reviewing legal documents, and analyzing contracts. Some experts estimate that AI can handle up to 25% of a lawyer's daily tasks. For instance, CourtCall, an audio and video calling company, has found a way to eliminate the need for physical trips to and from the courtroom. They use the Meeting Owl to appear in court via video, conduct remote interviews, and perform other activities that typically occur in the courtroom.
However, the main obstacle to widespread adoption of technology is the inability to differentiate between expense and value. Even before the pandemic, national judicial groups, such as the Conference of Supreme Court Presidents (CCJ) and the Conference of State Court Administrators (COSCA), had been advocating for courts to use technology to improve the experience of litigants, especially those without lawyers. The incorporation of technology into the judicial system has been a turning point, particularly in criminal defense cases. However, some may view technology as a distraction that prevents users from focusing on the task at hand. Despite its advantages, there are still some challenges and limitations when it comes to incorporating technology into the judicial system. For instance, less than 3% of documents mention access for people with limited English proficiency, less than 1.5% address the needs of people with disabilities, and none specifically mention technological adaptations for these populations.
In practice, new technologies have often limited rather than expanded the ways in which these groups can interact with the civil system. However, despite these challenges, doubts, and lack of conclusive evidence, most technology users agree that technology has a place in the courts. If we do not accept its use, litigants will be left behind. The COVID-19 pandemic has further highlighted the importance of technology in ensuring equitable processes. During this time, technology has disproportionately benefited parties with lawyers and those who heavily rely on the judicial system, such as debt collectors.
This raises questions about the objective of judicial officials to ensure fairness and equal access to justice. For those interested in using technology in court proceedings, it is essential to obtain permission from the court beforehand. Once permission is granted, please contact our Courtroom Technology department at least five business days before the scheduled procedure. This will allow us to ensure a smooth and efficient process. While judicial officials have long recognized the barriers faced by people without lawyers and the potential of technology to eliminate some of those barriers, progress had been slow before the pandemic. By studying the effects of technology during the COVID-19 pandemic, courts can better understand its impact on litigants, especially those without lawyers.
This will enable them to make improvements and help Americans resolve disputes and avoid life-altering consequences. Some courts have already begun sharing their data with users, media outlets, and external evaluators to monitor their technological innovations. However, in some states, people without an attorney still struggle to submit necessary documentation in eviction cases.