Technological innovation is playing an increasing role in furthering access to justice by ensuring that everyone has timely and accurate assistance to their legal needs. Let’s look at three ways technology is improving access to justice:
We must continue to acknowledge the benefit of remote access to court proceedings for court users beyond its application during the COVID-19 pandemic. Virtual hearings benefit those who are otherwise unable to attend in-person court hearings due to transportation, childcare, work commitments, or physical abilities. Virtual court proceedings reduce these barriers, minimizing the disruption to court users’ personal and professional lives.
Closely related, Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) platforms allow parties to resolve their cases virtually. For example, Connecticut has implemented an Online Ticket Review program that allows court users charged with certain offenses to plead guilty and pay a fine or challenge the citation by uploading evidence for the prosecutor’s response and review, allowing the person to upload evidence and documentation for the prosecutor’s review and response. This allows the court user to be heard without traveling to court for a lengthy and unpredictable court session.
Some courts have even adopted online, self-scheduling dockets to empower court users to schedule appearances at their convenience, increasing the likelihood of their attendance and participation.
Community service is often used as an alternative sentence or payment of fines and fees; however, it comes with the same barriers as attending court in person. Addressing similar concerns, Hawaii offers a virtual community service option that removes these barriers. One of the virtual programs partners with the Smithsonian, where court users transcribe historical documents to complete virtual service hours. This provides an opportunity for court users to enjoy the benefits of alternative sanctions where their home or work obligations would have otherwise not permitted it.
Self-help centers empower litigants and benefit the courts by reducing reliance on clerks, improving legal filings, and enhancing litigant preparedness. Bringing court-based self-help centers online expands their reach and allows for the same services without burdening court users with travel to receive the services. For example, Utah and Massachusetts provide services to court users across urban and rural areas of the state through virtual self-help services.
Navigating the legal system without a lawyer requires searching through what may feel like endless information, forms, and documents, looking for direction. Chatbots have emerged as a tool that can assist with court user questions, identify resources, and translate legal jargon into plain language. Check out SANDI (Self-Help Assistant Navigator for Digital Interactions) from the Eleventh Judicial Circuit of Florida—a chatbot that uses Natural Language Processing to help users navigate the court website.
Once users determine the right course of action, the instructions to complete forms and pleadings remain a significant challenge for pro se court users. Guided interviews, often compared to TurboTax, simplify the drafting process to a step-by-step question and answer. This approach removes the intimidation of a blank page or form and focuses the court user on smaller tasks to complete their goal.
Courts are also looking to technology to support their processes and increase efficiency. For instance, Suffolk University Law School's Legal Innovation and Technology Lab developed RateMyPDF—an AI-powered tool incorporating GPT-3, allowing courts to upload court forms and receive suggestions for improved simplicity, accessibility, and usability. Where court users often have a hard time completing court forms efficiently and completely, RateMyPDF offers revisions to court officials so the form continues to collect necessary information and improves the court user experience.
Courts are further exploring how natural language processing can improve efficiency in processing filings with automated civil case triage to assign cases into the appropriate civil case processing tracks.
As these technological advancements continue, we must be intentional in using innovation to bolster services rather than replace them. The digital divide still exists across the country, and we must continue to offer low or no-tech access to legal services. Further, we must also be diligent in creating online content that meets web accessibility requirements and can be used by all.
