Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Court Access topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee approves substitute to standardize courthouse device policies and protect confidential attorney‑client communications
Summary
A substitute to create a model policy for portable electronic devices in Virginia courthouses, clarify attorney credentialing and security‑screening, and require local correctional facilities to provide confidential attorney‑client communications was adopted and referred to finance. Supporters said the change improves access for self‑represented litigants; some members urged caution about statewide preemption of local practices.
Senate Judiciary Committee — Richmond — Senators approved a substituted bill that would allow chief judges to establish clear courthouse policies on portable electronic devices, require security screening and limited designated areas for device use, and set minimum standards for confidential communications between attorneys and detained clients.
Supporters argued the policy would reduce arbitrary local variation and help self‑represented litigants who often carry evidence or documents on phones that are currently barred from many courthouses. David Tissell, a pro bono attorney, told the committee his housing clients frequently cannot bring photos or messages stored on phones into court and are thus disadvantaged.
The substitute also includes provisions affecting sheriff and jail policies and an enactment clause asking for a report on jail communications capabilities by November 1, 2026. The Office of the Executive Secretary said the substitute mirrors a model Supreme Court policy developed in 2018 but adds items that local sheriffs and jail administrators also control. The committee adopted a line amendment clarifying coverage for people "held in custody" and reported the substitute and referred it to finance (roll recorded in transcript: Ayes 9, Noes 6).
Why it matters: Advocates said a uniform approach will reduce confusion for courthouse visitors and prevent the loss of evidence for self‑represented litigants; judges retain discretion to tailor local policies within the statute's parameters.
What’s next: Substitute reported and referred to finance for fiscal and operational review and to coordinate with the Supreme Court model policy.
