The pandemic has forced NC courts to change for the better

Since the start of the pandemic, the state’s courtrooms have been mostly empty. The conveyor belt of justice – an endless flow of cases civil and criminal, serious and petty – has slowed to a crawl.

As the court system comes back in the next several months, it should come back changed. North Carolina courts should not return to courtrooms overflowing with defendants waiting for hours to have a minute before a judge. It was never right. Now social distancing won’t allow it.

Just as businesses are discovering efficiencies as their employees work from home, the courts are seeing what could change for good in how they operate. More can be done, and it can be done faster by using electronic filing and video technology. Court dockets can be trimmed to cases that truly require a judge and a presence in court.

State Rep. Joe John, D-Wake, is a former judge and prosecutor and head of the North Carolina Courts Commission, a panel of legislators, citizens, lawyers, judges and district attorneys that evaluates the state’s court system and makes recommendations to the General Assembly. He thinks the disruption of the court system has already accelerated technological changes in how courts function. “Across the board we will never return to the normal as we once knew it,” he told the Editorial Board.

With court proceedings reduced to only what is essential, it is clear how much may not be necessary at all. Normal caseloads are bloated – often by procedural rather than criminal violations – and many visits to court could be eliminated by handing the matters administratively or remotely.

“Just because we’ve done things one way for 200 years doesn’t mean we have to do it that way for the next 200 years when there is a more efficient and effective way,” John said.

The jolt of this crisis should also break loose proposed reforms that have long been stuck. Pre-trial release procedures should be eased to have fewer defendants for minor crimes waiting in jail. The ever-growing fees for court services and court-ordered programs should be eliminated, or at least reduced for those who can’t afford the expense and end up in more legal trouble for non-payment. More civil and family court cases can be resolved by mediation in video conferences.

Big changes will require an increase in funding for the court system. Although the judiciary is one of three co-equal branches of state government, it receives only about 2 percent of the state budget. As it is, the court system contributes more money in fees and fines to the state’s general fund than it receives back in state funding.

Now the courts need immediate help. Court-related payments have dropped sharply during the hiatus in most legal proceedings. Meanwhile expenses will rise as the system starts to process a surge of delayed cases while meeting social distancing requirements.

John expects to file legislation Tuesday seeking $20 million in emergency funding for the courts. He knows the request will be competing with many others. “Everyone is going to need more and there is substantially less,” he said.

But even in a time of scarce state revenue, court funding should be a top priority. Adequate and consistent funding would encourage the system to expand its use of technology and move away from fees. A system that relies on excessive and regressive fees is by its nature unjust.

It would be true justice if the adjustments forced by the pandemic lead to lasting changes that will make the court system both more efficient and less unfair.