Nearly 300 court leaders from 49 states, three territories, and the District of Columbia, concluded the first ever Nation Summit on Language Access and the Courts in Houston, Texas, October 1-3, 2012. The Summit focused on developing solutions to improve access to justice for litigants with Limited English Proficiency (LEP). The Summit enabled state court leaders to share successful strategies and evidence-based practices, plan system improvements, and discuss ways to pursue greater consistency across the states on policies related to court interpretation. A Summit website is available that includes the Summit program, speaker bios, and videos conference and events section. A National Call to Action report will be issued on the Summit’s outcomes and strategies.

The Executive Session for State Court Leaders in the 21st Century (SJI-07-I-203, and SJI-11-I-064) brought together state court leaders including chief justices, judges, and court administrators, as well as key stakeholders to address an array of issues impacting the state courts, including:

• adapting to the budget crisis and leadership in times of limited resources;
• identification of essential principles for effective court governance;
• the tension between problem solving and decision making;
• the challenges social media pose to court legitimacy;
• how courts defend themselves from political attack; and,
• the concept of chief justices as civic leaders.

The SJI and Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance (DOJ/BJA) funded Executive Session recently released the fourth and fifth papers from the series. Additionally, the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) has created a Vimeo Feed that includes introductory videos explaining the purpose and significance of the papers. A brief explanation of each paper with a link follows:

A Case for Court Governance Principles
In this report, Utah Chief Justice Christine Durham and Utah State Court Administrator Dan Becker describe the limits to what structural changes like centralization can accomplish. Recognizing that court culture inherently stresses independence and self-interest, the authors propose eleven unifying principles to guide states as they seek to improve court performance.

Herding Lions: Shared Leadership of State Trial Courts
Retired Arizona Judge Barbara Mundell and Texas Chief Justice Wallace Jefferson put forward an approach based on the recognition that all courts within a state have a collective responsibility for the quality of justice. They urge that leadership be shared across the different levels of court structure and that local innovation be encouraged and, where effective, replicated statewide.

Opinions as the Voice of the Court: How State Supreme Courts Can Communicate Effectively and Promote Procedural Fairness
This paper discusses the nature of, and trends in, the formation of state supreme court opinions and the methods by which opinions are communicated to the press, the public, members of the bar, and online communities. It considers current practice in light of a field in social psychology called procedural fairness—a practical theory that explains what makes it likely that people are satisfied with and comply with decisions by authorities, such as judges.

Courts Are Conversations: An Argument for Increased Engagement by Court Leaders
Social media expert Garrett Graff explains the true significance of the arrival of social media as it alters the expectations and habits of American society. He advises state court leaders that they “must not only learn how to communicate with new tools; they must also envision new means of judicial engagement with the public through the new social media that can further advance the legitimacy of courts in a democratic society.”

Juror and Jury Use of New Media: A Baseline Exploration
NCSC staff members Paula Hannaford-Agor, David Rottman, and Nicole Waters offer insights into the current and likely future use of new media by jurors at all stages of the process. The project explored the impact of the new media on jurors and jury decision-making as a basis for recommending steps to reconcile new media use with the adversarial process.

SJI received 18 grant applications requesting a total of $1,349,759 for the 4th quarter of FY 2012. The Board met on September 17, 2012, to make decisions on those grant applications and awarded 15 grants totaling $791,537. Because of the high demand, SJI had to deny some applications due to lack of available funding in the 4th quarter.

Three (3) Project Grants were awarded, including: the New Mexico Administrative Office of the Courts to develop language access training for court employees to provide enhanced language access outside the courtroom; the American Bar Association (ABA) and the National Guardianship Network (NGN) to promote guardianship networks across the U.S.; and a judicial workload assessment for the Pennsylvania courts.

Seven (9) Technical Assistance (TA) Grants were awarded, including: a language access project for the Rhode Island Judiciary; a readiness assessment of the Superior Court’s adult probation department in Imperial County, California; development of a succession plan for the Guam Judiciary; a pilot project for jury management using technology in the Fourth Judicial District Court of Minnesota; an evaluation of the organizational structures of the Supreme and Superior Courts in the U.S. Virgin Islands; a planning study for justice center facilities in Barberton, Ohio; rural court reengineering for Cochise County, Arizona; and court security projects in Orleans Parish, Louisiana, and the State of Hawaii.

Three (3) Curriculum Adaptation and Training (CAT) Grants were awarded, including: development of a National Judicial College (NJC) course on the legal issues related to fracking along the Marcellus Shale; a curriculum development project on human trafficking for the National Association of Women Judges (NAWJ); and training for family law judges on immigration, domestic violence, and sexual assault for the National Immigrant Women’s Advocacy Project at American University.

On September 13, 2012, the House passed a six-month Continuing Resolution (CR) (HJ Res. 117) for FY 2013. The Senate passed the CR on September 22, 2012. The CR will enable SJI to maintain current operations at the FY 2012 funding level, and award 1st quarter FY 2013 grants.

On September 21, 2012, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) released a report detailing the impact of a possible sequestration, as required by the Sequestration Transparency Act of 2012 (P.L. 112-155). Should sequestration happen, SJI will be subject to an 8.2 percent reduction, or $419,922, from the FY 2012 funding level.

On May 24, 2012, the Senate Judiciary Committee passed the Local Courthouse Safety Act of 2012 (S.2076). The House passed the bill (H.R. 6185) on August 1, 2012. The bill enables state courts to request excess surplus security equipment from the federal government. In addition, the legislation adds a purpose area to the SJI Authorization Act highlighting SJI’s authority to award grants to improve court security.

The 4th National Symposium on Court Management, held at the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) in October 2010, convened a range of state court stakeholders for only the 4th time since 1981. Participation at this symposium was by invitation only; however, the NCSC has recently made the resources from this event available to the entire state court community through a website titled, Readings from the 4th National Symposium on Court Management. The website includes the symposium program, videos, materials, and a summary of the results from a recent survey on the well-being and growth of state courts.

SJI received 23 grant applications requesting a total of $1,349,759 for the 4th quarter of FY 2012. The Board will meet on September 17, 2012, to finalize decisions on grant awards for the last quarter of this fiscal year. The results of this Board meeting will be available that same week.

SJI continues to receive inquiries regarding funding priorities and interests for FY 2013. The SJI Grant Guideline for FY 2013 will be available online through the SJI website in October. The grant and Education Support Program (ESP) application deadlines for FY 2013 are: 1st quarter – November 1, 2012; 2nd quarter – February 1, 2013; 3rd quarter – May 1, 2013; and, 4th quarter – August 1, 2013. SJI staff are available to assist with questions on the application process, and applicants are encouraged to review the SJI website and social media outlets for information and news on recently funded projects.

The SJI-funded Immigration and the State Courts Initiative, led by the Center for Public Policy Studies (CPPS), is alerting state courts that deferred action for childhood arrivals recently announced by the Department of Homeland Security/U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) will likely result in requests for state court records by individuals applying for consideration under the program. The program provides deferral of removal action for two years, with the possibility of renewal for additional two-year periods, and applies to individuals who meet certain requirements, including having not been convicted of a felony, significant misdemeanor, three or more misdemeanors, or posing a threat to national security or public safety.

This requirement will likely result in numerous requests to state courts for records, as any individual with an arrest record will have the burden of showing to USCIS, on the initial request and as part of any request for subsequent renewal, that the arrests did not result in conviction of any of the crimes that preclude eligibility for deferred prosecution. CPPS has published an article on the uses of state court records in removal proceedings that explains the different types of records that may be used by federal immigration officials to determine the character of a criminal conviction.

CPPS has a website available for background information on these issues, recent reports, and guidance for how to obtain technical assistance.

In 2007, the Arkansas General Assembly adopted the Arkansas Court Security Act to ensure safe and secure courthouse environments through a general program for security and emergency preparedness for the judicial branch. The Act created a court security grant program for cities and counties that have developed security and emergency preparedness plans. In addition, the Act created a Director of Security and Emergency Preparedness position with the Arkansas Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC). One of the Director’s responsibilities was to develop a required training and certification program of not less than 12 hours for court security officers, in addition to their basic law enforcement training. Court security officers must complete the program within a year of beginning service.

In order to meet this requirement, the Arkansas AOC was awarded an SJI grant in FY 2008 (SJI-08-T-147) to develop this new certification program. The AOC selected the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) to provide the technical assistance needed to develop the curriculum, and administer the training to a core group of court security officer trainers throughout the state. The principal areas of course coverage include: 1) overview of the Arkansas court system and procedures; 2) overview of relevant constitutional, statutory, and case law for court security; 3) best practices for providing courthouse and courtroom security; 4) procedures for jury trials; 5) prisoners in the courtroom and their transport; and 6) protection of individuals and targeted threats.

The SJI-funded court security officer “train the trainer” program was conducted in December of 2008. Following the conclusion of the grant, the AOC began partnering with local courts and law enforcement agencies to host the course across the state. Since 2008, approximately 1,550 law enforcement officers have participated in the training statewide.

On September 13, 2011, a man entered the Crawford County Courthouse (located in Van Buren, Arkansas) looking for a judge. The assailant was armed with three semi-automatic handguns and a semi-automatic rifle when he entered the courthouse. There were no metal detectors at the entrance of the courthouse, and court was not in session at the time he entered the building. However, court staff were able to contact 911 through recently installed panic alarms that were acquired through the State’s court security grant program. The assailant shot the judge’s assistant, and then exited the courthouse and began exchanging gunfire with law enforcement officers and was eventually killed. Two of the responding law enforcement officers that day had completed the court security officer training. In subsequent interviews, both officers noted the value of this training, especially the modules on responding to violent scenarios in the courthouse.

Despite judges, court administrators, and law enforcement officers working together to improve court security, not all courthouses, especially those in rural areas, are fully protected. Staffing, equipment, and training are all key to adequate protection of the courts and the citizens they serve. According to research from the Center for Judicial and Executive Security, court violence is on the rise. There has been a steady increase in shootings, bombings, and arson attacks over the last 40 years – 28 incidents from 1970-1979; 45 from 1980-1989; 67 from 1990-1999; and 88 from 2000-2009. Already in 2012, there have been five courthouse shootings across the United States. The training and certification program developed in Arkansas can be a model for other states seeking to address this critical issue.

SJI received 15 grant applications requesting a total of $756,684 for the 3rd quarter of FY 2012. The Board met on June 18, 2012, in Seattle, Washington to make decisions on those applications, in addition to attending briefings by the Washington Judiciary and Center for Public Policy Studies.

Two (2) Project Grants were awarded, including one to the Minnesota State Court Administrator’s Office to develop an online conservator reporting system that is based on a pilot system developed in Ramsey County, Minnesota. The Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System (IAALS) also received a grant to assess Colorado Rule 16.1 governing civil procedures and evaluate the existing Civil Access Pilot Project (CAPP) in the Denver, Colorado, metro area, which was developed to help courts expedite business case processing.

Nine (9) Technical Assistance (TA) Grants were approved, including: development of appellate court time standards by National Center for State Courts (NCSC) in close coordination with the Conference of Chief Justices (CCJ) and Conference of State Court Administrators (COSCA); reengineering of the Pierce County District Court in Washington; implementation of a high performance court framework in Ottawa County, Michigan; development of an instructional video for self-represented litigants in family court matters by the Connecticut Judicial Branch; a second phase of the Massachusetts Trial Court/AOC language access project for small claims proceedings; a process improvement project for probate matters Maricopa County, Arizona; and grants to the Arkansas Access to Justice Commission, Minnesota AOC, and Colorado Judicial Department for projects addressing self-represented litigants and the state courts. The TA Grant to the Minnesota AOC is the first phase of a project to create a statewide e-filing system for self-represented litigants.

Two (2) Curriculum Adaptation & Training (CAT) Grants were approved, including: delivery of motivational interview training to court staff at the 29th Judicial District’s Court of Common Pleas in Lycoming County, Pennsylvania, and a second phase of the Pillars of Service Excellence Program for the Connecticut Judicial Branch.

The next (and final) deadline for grants in FY 2012 is August 1, 2012 (4th quarter, FY 2012).

SJI began using the Strategic Initiatives Grants (SIG) program in FY 2008 to address immigration issues and the state courts at a national impact level. As part of this effort, SJI in coordination with the Center for Public Policy Studies (CPPS) began working with the state courts to determine how immigration issues are impacting them. Two overarching themes developed out of this work: 1) state court capacity to provide effective service is challenged by the magnitude and intensity of current and anticipated immigration (equal access to justice); and 2) the intersection of federal immigration law and practice, and state law, can result in unintended consequences for litigants and state court systems.

CPPS has been working over the past four years with state courts to address this issue, and has also produced various products at the national level dealing with state courts and immigration issues. During the June 18, 2012, Board meeting, Dr. John Martin from CPPS briefed the SJI Board on the four activities completed as part of the project, and the two remaining activities which are currently underway, including providing direct technical assistance to the state courts.

The following activities are components of this multi-year initiative: 1) identify the major challenges and opportunities state courts need to address when dealing with immigrants in the courts and establishing a web-based resource network; 2) work with nine diverse court jurisdictions to learn the challenges they face in addressing the needs of immigrant populations that use the courts and how to best address those challenges; 3) prepare separate electronic, interactive bench guides for assisting judges and court administrators across the nation address the practical implications of state court criminal case processing involving immigrants, and addressing the nexus of federal immigration status and family, juvenile, and dependency case processing; 4) prepare an interactive electronic Guidebook for Addressing the Impacts of Immigration in the State Courts that can be used in courts across the nation; 5) develop and conduct courses for judges and court personnel for addressing the impacts of immigration in the state courts and establishing and coordinating a nation-wide training network; and 6) establish and facilitate an on-going federal/state dialogue to promote better collaboration between federal agencies and the state courts when addressing immigration issues that impact the state courts.

In FY 2012, with SJI assistance, CPPS began focusing on human trafficking issues and the state courts. Specifically, helping the state courts determine the knowledge, expertise, processes, and basic infrastructure needed to address human trafficking. In addition, CPPS is working to develop model protocols, tools, and training for judges and court personnel on how to effectively manage cases involving immigrant litigants with mental health issues.

These resources are available for download free of charge from the CPPS website. Please contact the Immigration and the State Courts Initiative team at CPPS if there are any questions on the content, or for technical assistance.