World War II’s silk shortage forced the military to abandon a comfortable default; nylon parachutes—stronger, cheaper, and mass-producible—started as a substitute and became the superior standard. COVID-19 did the same to courts. When in-person appearances collapsed, remote video conferencing stepped in, proving faster, more accessible, and more efficient. In both cases, crisis stripped away habit and revealed the “workaround” as the upgrade.
Here’s a short, honest case for why permitting parties and their lawyers appear for hearings (and even trials) by video, when appropriate, should be the norm.
Participation and access jump
Remote options reduce no-shows and make it far easier for people to attend around work, school, transport, or childcare. Failures to appear drop appreciably when appearances moving online. Participation in court proceedings improves overall when remote appearances are offered.
Safety and dignity
Domestic violence and elder-abuse survivors report less anxiety and safer participation when they aren’t forced to share a physical courtroom with an abuser.
Substantial, concrete cost savings (and security gains)
Video conference appearances slash transport costs and risks (escapes, assaults) among the incarcerated.
Less life disruption for litigants and witnesses
People don’t have to lose wages, arrange childcare, or drive hours for a 15-minute hearing; that’s why participation climbs. Remote participants overwhelmingly report a positive experience.
Scheduling speed and docket management
Courts can stack short matters more efficiently, bring in out-of-state experts for narrow issues, and avoid continuances when one person can’t physically appear in court. Overall access improves and calendars move efficiently because more people can attend the first time.
Better language access (when set up right)
Remote platforms support simultaneous interpretation channels and quick access to rare-language interpreters, with breakout rooms for confidential attorney-client consultations during the hearing. (This requires minimal standards/training, which courts have published.)
Privileged communications not impeded
- Private breakout rooms and similar features preserve attorney-client confidentiality mid-hearing.
- And if that’s not enough, just mute your mic and talk to your attorney on the phone or via text message.
Greater public access and transparency
The public can observe court proceedings via posted links; Utah courts and others routinely publish Webex/Zoom access, which actually expands public access beyond physical seating limits.
Resilience
Remote keeps courts running through weather, health, or building disruptions and makes hybrid calendars routine instead of ad hoc.
Utah courts explicitly allow in-person, remote, or hybrid appearances and explain how to request remote. Public access pages routinely post remote links. District standing orders address digital evidence for remote/hybrid calendars. In short: infrastructure and rules already exist; you just need to invoke them. See Utah Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 87.
Anticipating the usual pushback (and the fixes)
- “Remote feels less fair.” Some users report lower perceptions of procedural fairness, but that’s mostly due to resistance to change. With sensible policies and procedures in place, nothing about the remote nature of a court proceeding is inherently unfair.
- Remote hearings make evidence handling difficult. And Interpreting is harder online. Understood, but these challenges stem from developing new policies and procedures for a different (and frankly, better) way of participating in hearings. These challenges are simply new, not insurmountable. Already, progress has been made and continues to improve. Again, the kinks cannot be worked out if all we do is abandon the new, better way, for complacent continuation of the old inferior way.
- Standing orders and guides now make digital exhibits and pre-hearing exchange straightforward for remote/hybrid calendars.
Remote appearances increase participation, reduce costs and risks, protect vulnerable parties, and keep dockets moving. We have (and have had for some time now) the rules, toolkits, and other resources to implement remote appearances successfully now, and it’s only getting better.
Utah Family Law, LC | divorceutah.com | 801-466-9277