Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Remote Proceedings topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Judicial Council reports more than 6 million remote proceedings since 2022; urges legislative extension

Judicial Council of California · February 20, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Council staff reported that California courts have conducted over 6 million remote proceedings since March 2022, averaging about 7,098 remote proceedings daily; presenters said remote proceedings expand access to justice and recommended legislative action to extend current statutory authorization.

The Judicial Council received an annual report on the use of remote technology in trial courts and voted to accept the report after floor discussion on Feb. 20.

Jessica Devincenzi, who leads the Office of Policy and Research, summarized the data: “Since March 2022, California courts have held over 6,000,000 remote proceedings,” and during the most recent reporting period courts averaged 7,098 remote proceedings per day. She said that between Sept. 1, 2024 and Aug. 31, 2025 there were 1,746,288 remote proceedings statewide — about 1.2 million civil and a little over 550,000 criminal matters. Devincenzi also reported that 95% of users surveyed in the last reporting period described their experience as positive.

Julia Hannigan and Judge Lisa Rodriguez described operational benefits in dependency and criminal matters: Hannigan said remote options improve access for parents, specialists and experts, and can be essential when travel is difficult for families or service providers. Judge Rodriguez emphasized that remote options remove barriers that can prevent participation, such as lost wages or childcare costs.

Council members praised the report’s data and urged follow‑up on related security and cost‑savings analyses. Several members suggested adding explicit language on courtroom security and on quantifying savings for sheriffs, counsel and court operations. The council approved the report; the presenters noted the legislature must act to extend statutory authorization beyond the current sunset dates.

Why it matters: the findings show widespread reliance on remote tools that meaningfully reduce barriers for court users, expand access to experts and counsel, and support continuity of operations. Members asked staff to include more detailed cost‑benefit and security data in future reports.