Transcripts For CSPAN2 House Judiciary Hearing On Coronavirus Pandemic Federal Courts 20240712

Hearing on the covid19 pandemic best practices and opportunities for innovation. Before we begin i would like to remind members that we have established in the military and the distribution list dedicated to circulating red materials that members might want to offer is part of our hearing today. If you would like to submit that terry will. Send them to the email address that has been previously distributed to you all and we will circulate the materials to members and staff as quickly as we can. I also ask unanimous consent that following items be entered into the record. A letter to chairman johnson and Ranking Member roby and the American Association of judges and the results of a study in a recent survey by the federal Bar Association and its members on Legal Practices in the covid19 era. Without objection, so admitted. I will recognize myself for an opening statement. Welcome to the Senate Committee hearing on courts during the covid19 pandemic best practices and opportunities for innovation and lessons for the future. For more than seven Years Congress has provided quote all courts of the United States shall be deemed to be always open end quote. That congressional mandate and the principles it embodies have been dashed by the pandemic sweeping across the country. The idea of open justice is fundamental and innate constitutional democracy. It encompasses a range of meanings but today im going to focus on three. First, it must be open for business to be able to not just received emotions but to hear arguments hold trials and issue decisions without the undue [inaudible] second our courts must be open to the public because of decisions are made in the dark and third justice means that our courts must be safe and accessible to all. Our judiciary is decentralized by design and inclined towards incrementalism so it is to their credit and our federal courts move relatively quickly to maintain their operations and protect the health and safety in the face of the coronavirus three judges and Court Administrators took up decisions that probably saved lives including courthouses, and held hearings by phone and video. One court held the first with their courtrooms close many judges open their proceedings to the public through live video and audio. Even the Supreme Court which was committed to closing itself off from the public allowed live audio broadcasts for their arguments. With months of experience behind this and we are still in only the first wave of a virus has become clear the courts and Congress Needed to do much more if we wanted the courts to be open during his pandemic and after. Its also clear that we can dous whether that the second or third wave or a future pandemic. Theres an alarming backlog of motions and trials that are not addressed and parties who cannot afford to wait for judgment. The judiciary embrace a bill of Technology Options including support personnel and witnesses into courthouses to 10 exec could have been held remotely. The risk of infection could shut the public and the media out of life proceedings. Thats could have been held remotely. It could shut the public and the media out of the live proceeding and the lack of an alternative could shut them out of remote proceedings. The Supreme Court might return to its practice of forcing people to wait in long lines to cycle through a packed courtroom. It will force the judiciary to make some uncomfortable choices. There is a powerful desire to give back to the marmol but the course of the people at risk if they try to go back to how they operated before the pandemic. The judiciary should meet this crisis and making the court more open more effective and safer than ever before. During the pandemic and beyond. They can start by following the increasingly marked by many innovative state and local judges. The coronavirus asked what kind of government are we . What kind of government should we be and most importantly what kind of government will we be . Are federal courts are no exception. I hope todays hearing will help us find answers to preserve justice and the courts and protect the rule of law. It is now my pleasure to recognize the Ranking Member on the Senate Committee the gentlewoman from alabama ms. Roby for opening statement. Thank you mr. Chairman. Good morning and i thank you for participating in todays hearing. I want to First Express to all affected by the covid19 pandemic. 120,000 americans have died and continue to be infected. We are praying for families and loved ones who have been impacted that this terrible virus. Chairman johnson thank you for convening a hearing on a timely and important topic and its nice to be back at the committee hearing. The entire federal government including the Judicial Branch have reacted to the deadly covid19 virus through the federal judiciary has had jury trials done in person with social distancing guidelines. We no covid19 has not affect did each the same. Our federal judiciary and the public courts know how to safely open through we need to ensure the federal judiciary it hears is the start looking at what proceedings will look like you had. I look forward to hearing about the judicial competence and guidance to federal court during this challenging time. The judicial conference and it ministered of office play a Critical Role in supporting an efficient effective and productive federal judiciary. I also know that today we have the opportunity to discuss how congress can support the Administrative Office the courts and in their continuing response to the pandemic. Some other witnesses may decide to use the permit Remote Technology in the courtroom even after the country recovers from covid19. However as i mentioned in my remarks last september at the subcommittee hearing on judicial transparency i have deep concerns about the use of cameras in the courtroom and the live broadcast. As we consider the use of technology in the court we need to ensure the hearing is fully prepared to utilize technology and act with safe guards in place. We also need to remember that some courts in jurisdictions may not the readily equipped with the technological capability required to participate in remote judicial proceedings. For example parts of my district in alabama are [roll call] and securing access to quality broadband is a real challenge. While we discussed the reopening of the judicial system we need to consider the best practices and how we can safely reopen so that the native proceedings in our courts can continue. I look forward to hearing from all of our members today and i thank you for your time to testify this morning. Thank you mr. Chairman and i yield back create thank you. We will now introduce our witnesses. Again i yield to the gentleman from arizona who will introduce judge campbell. Its minor change induced judge David Campbell from the district at their summit. Judge campbell has been a United States District Court judge for her son is since 2003 and the senior judge since 2018. He currently chairs the committee on rules of procedure for the u. S. Federal courts which oversees the work of five Advisory Committees on the federal rules of civil criminal bankruptcy and appellate procedure and the federal rules of evidence serves serves as chair serves as chairs the Advisory Committee on the federal rules of civil procedure from 2011 to 2015 and is a member of the committee from 2005 to 2003 judge campbells member the American Law Institute a fellow of the American Bar Foundation and a board member of the Judicial College of arizona and im proud to have a fellow arizona and here today at to represent our courts in front of congress. Judge campbell. Thank you and welcome judge campbell. Next we go to chief justice bridget mccormack. She joined the Supreme Court in 2013 and became chief justice and 2019. Before her election to the court she started as a clinical professor of law associate dean of Clinical Affairs and codirector of the innocence clinic at the university of Michigan Law School. Prior to joining the university of Michigan Law School faculty she was a fellow itl law school. Before that she worked as a staff attorney with the office of the appellate defender and as is a senior Trial Attorney with the criminal defense Legal Aid Society in new york city. Chief Justice Mccormack received her b. A. From Trinity College and her j. D. From New York University school of law. Will come judge. Judge jeremy fogel became the First Executive director of the Berkeley Judicial Institute in 2018. Prior to his appointment at her glee he served as director of the federal Judicial Center as a United States district judge for the Northern District of california and as a judge for the Santa Clara County superior court in a simple courts. He received his b. A. From Stanford University and his j. D. From harvard law school. Judge fogel has received many accolades including the president s award for Outstanding Service to the california and judiciary from the California Judges Association and recognition from the Santa Clara County Bar Association for exemplifying the highest professionalism in the judiciary. Welcome judge fogel. Last but not least we have melissa water. She is a policy analyst at the Reporters Committee for freedom of the press. Prior to joining the Reporters Committee saeb worked as a law fellow for the American Constitution Society and legal intern to the House Democratic caucus in the ohio house of her recent represents her shes a former Human Rights Campaign mccleary fellow and a recipient of the michael e. Mauritz Leadership Award in law. Ms. Wasser received her b. A. From Youngstown State University and j. D. And m. A. In Public Policy and management from the ohio state university. Welcome. Before proceeding with testimony i hereby remind the witnesses that all of your written and oral statements made to the subcommittee connection with this hearing on subject 18 usc section 1001. Please note your written statements will be offered into the record in its entirety. I ask that you summarize your testimony in five minutes and to help you stay within that time theres a timing light that im not sure is visible to you. If it is not visible to you i will tap the gavel when you have 30 seconds left and when you have 10 seconds left i will tap it a little louder. Judge campbells view may begin. Chairman johnson Ranking Member roby and members of the subcommittee good morning and thank you for inviting the judiciary to testify on how the federal courts are responding to the covid19 pandemic create a peer on behalf of the judicial conference of the United States. Like other institutions the operations of the federal judiciary have been seriously disrupted by the pandemic. Im pleased to report however that judges and districts bankruptcy and Appellate Courts continue to hold hearings issue positions and resolve cases. Jury trials and grand jury proceedings have been postponed in most districts but other proceedings continued to the greatest extent possible through video and telephone conferencing. In february the ministered of office of the u. S. Courts established a covid19 task force to monitor the impact of the virus on Court Operations and provide guidance and resources to courts on emerging issues. The covid19 web site was established on the judiciarys internet which addresses pandemic related information and resources on a wide range of relevant topics. Circuit and District Courts use these resources to meet their local needs. On april 24 we were published recovered guidance for phase 3 reopening of courts. These include gaging criterion of realtime dashboard courts can use to obtain information about their own communities. It also established an internet hub on its web site to keep the public informed about Court Operations and some 20,000 Court Employees are teleworking through the courts and virtual private network. For the courts reconvening a jury trial is there prior to. Individual courts are developing jury procedures for their unique situation and seek to minimize health risks for all participants. On june 14 a subgroup of the task force provided a detailed and helpful report on conducting jury trials and convening grand juries during the pandemic. Many federal courts are also communicating with their state court counterparts to exchange relevant information and best practices. It is difficult to predict the extent that the case back log that will result from the pandemic could some delays will result from the fact that jury trials have been postponed and will require priority attention when they can resume and of course bankruptcy courts will likely see a surge that will affect their caseloads. We very much appreciate the 7. 5 million in supplemental appropriations you have provided in the cares act to address Immediate Technology needs, increase costs in our probation and Pretrial Services programs. On april 28 the judicial conference submitted a supplemental funding request for 36. 6 million to address urgent needs such as enhanced cleaning of court facilities, Health Screening and courthouse entrances, technology and prescription or, costs associated with supervision of offenders released from prison early and security costs. Attachment one in my written statement provides Additional Details on this request. The judicial Conference Also identified 17 legislative proposals to address immediate covid19 impacts impose pandemic operations. We ask that you please consider these proposals carefully. They are summarized in attachment to do my written statement. Thank you for working with us to craft provisions in the cares act that made it possible to hold video and audio proceedings temporarily during the pandemic for many pretrial events in criminal cases. These provisions have worked well during the emergency end of allow courts to continue processing criminal cases. The cares act also directs the judicial conference in the Supreme Court to consider whether various sets of rules should be amended to include emergency procedures. That work is art in that way in the rules committees of the federal courts. Mr. Chairman thank you for the opportunity to address these issues. I will do my best to respond to any questions. Thank you judge campbell. Chief Justice Mccormack you may begin. I want to talk about how michigans judiciaries responded to the covid19 crisis. Thats what our work loading context. Michigan has 242 trial courts that adjudicate almost 3 million cases each year. Our courthouses are highdensity places and also unlike restaurants they are not places people generally have a choice about whether to visit. We have to figure how to maintain justice and keep the public in their Court Employees safe. Public trust is the only court pass for the rule of law is after all a set of ideas that are only as good as our collective state and with the great majority of litigants unrepresented rebuild that trust in our courtroom by what we do and how we do it. In three months we have changed more than in the past decade and now the benefits of innovation we have unique opportunity to create longterm and muchneeded change for Justice System. This pandemic was not the disruption that any of us wanted but it might need the disruption we needed to transform our judiciary into a more accessible transparent efficient and customer Friendly Branch of government. We have a bit of a head start in michigan. For the pandemic bird ministered of Supreme Court had invested in outfitting every courtroom in the state with a videoconferencing system and every judge with zoom. Midmarch on a timer team moved our entire workforce to remote work from home offices to tables and base our rec rooms are management analyst and Information Technology teams have been working overtime to provide a thighs, practical guidelines and Technical Support to transition to a statewide judiciary to virtual courtroom. Michigans court system is not like a federal judiciary with one Funding Source in one Case Management system. Our nonunified system of 242 courts has 160 different funding units nearly two dozen state Management Systems in 560 different elected judges. Despite the system since april 1 judges have held well over 50,000 hearings and are approaching 350,000 hours of on line meetings and to maintain Public Access these hearings are livestreamed or youtube. For easy Public Access to them we built a virtual trajectory which is a clickable map that allows people to watch any judge in the state. This directory has been used more than 25,000 times in the past month alone could one hearing in particular which had Public Interest that over 8000 viewers at one point. We also pioneered an on line dispute resolution platform that allows residents to resolve disputes with or without a a mediator in a phone tablet or laptop instead of going to court. Our free service will be available to every resident in the state. We also are private testing tech messages to notify the public. Dentist dentists do it when i judges . Are mind resources helping 10,000 visitors each day in addition to the regular toolkit. There are more than 30 covid19 related resources with the most popular providing information regarding unemployment insurance. We have issued a series of emergency orders to guide and support the trial courts transformation and response, removing barriers from proceedings and innovating new processes. For one example we transform how courts will handle the objections backlog once we expect a moratorium to end at the end of the month. Our order protects Public Health rationalizes state assessing and connects litigants to the Resources Available to resolve these cases and quitting 50 million from the cares act thank you very much. Virtual courtrooms are making our judiciary more accessible of the public for litigants to appear in court, lawyers can appear in court in faraway parts of the state all in the same morning. Litigants can appear in Court Without having to miss wanted to talk to a judge recently who had a criminal defendant with a misdemeanor in the break room from his job in a different state was grateful that he did not have to miss a day of work and was able to take responsibility and get on with his life. Litigants who have disabilities dont have to worry about it and how to make it to court. Transportation parking childcare and Job Responsibilities are not various to remote proceeding participate in it turns out zoom is less intimidating for parties who appear without lawyers at least from what we have learned so far. Theres something about the blazing nature of all of the zoom box as being the same size that makes people feel more heard and more respected. Maybe just less intimidating. Looking to the future we cannot get people back to courthouses were access to justice is an ongoing problem. Instead we must focus their resources on bringing justice to people where they live and where they work. We must rebuild what we do from the ground up and create a 21st century Justice System that is transparent and fair. By embracing innovation and collaboration agility and user centric design we will do just that. I look forward to answering any questions that you have. Thank you again for the opportunity to address you. Thank you cheap just to smoke or make it next may begin. Thank you mr. Chief justice. Members of the segment am honored to be here with you and im going to summarize my statement in three respects. This crisis that we are dealing with has been devastating to so many people in so many ways. Its also important to recognize it presents an opportunity. We enforced the judiciary along with many other institutions to do things differently and has been forced to do things that would not have contemplated had this not occurred. The result of having done it is that there is an enormous amount of data. The experience of the federal court we have already had and experience the state court has had. All of that has given us information about how these processes actually work and what is beneficial about them and what isnt beneficial about the more the technical glitches arent i think it would be a shame if we did not take advantage of that. One of the things im going to suggest the subcommittee consider is formalizing the idea of the study of the status we can look at it in a thoughtful and critical way. Judge campbell is an old friend and i have immense respect for the process of the rules committee so i think in normal times its a very well considered and thoughtful work. I also request a certain small concerted nature that the federal has and we are faced with a situation now where that approach is not quite as feasible as it normally is and so we have to figure out a way to proceed with care and thoughtfulness in deliberation but at the same time recognize we are working with a very much shortened timeframe because of the conditions we are in the backlog that is continuing to build up. I want to pick up on the point that the Ranking Member roby did in the beginning. There are several different dimensions of this problem. I describe it in a meeting we had yesterday. They are vectors. One of them certainly is access the idea that the public has a right to see whats going on in people have to have the ability to get into court. The use of Virtual Technology that creates or provides access is absolute critical principle. Equally important is efficiency. We have to get the work done in chairman johnson referred to veterans opening remarks. Work has to be done in a timely way so people dont wait forever for justice. The value of efficiency is very important finally and i think this goes to Ranking Member robreese pointers as whole idea of the quality of the value and core values of the judiciary. What really matters people need to be heard. People need to be seen. People need to be respected. There are socioeconomic differences in terms of who can get Virtual Access and is something the courts need to think about. How do you do this in a rural area and how do you do this in a place where people dont have the Internet Access readily available to them . What kinds of proceedings arent that the amenable to virtual justice. You are sending someone to prison for 20 years do you really want to do it that way and how do you do it constitutional trial in a jury case . All of this to me is imperative that we studied these issues and we think about them with care and we not waste the opportunity the Current Crisis has presented to us. If i were to have a wish list one would be that the committee, subcommittee recommends an authorized that type of study farreaching study of the many aspects and secondly it do what it needs to do and something that judge campbell said her by the legislative authorization to continue experimentation to suspend rules that need to be suspended or get the judiciary that leeway to continue the experimenting its doing. I agree with chief Justice Mccormack that i dont think we are ever going back to where we were before. Maybe some people would like that to have been. I think thats unlikely to happen and we have to anticipate and new normal and we have to build that new normal with the same kind of care and deliberation that we feel as normal. Thank you very much and its an honor to be with you in that or to answering whatever questions you have with me. Thank you and last but not least news arash markazi. Ms. Wasser. Thank you chairman johnson Ranking Member roby and members of the six subcommittee. Im a policy analyst with the committee for freedom of the press a Nonprofit Organization that has been defending the First Amendment rights of journalists since the 1970s. Again thank you for giving me the opportunity to testify here today and thank you for your leadership on increasing court access throughout the federal judiciary. Today my statement i will recommend we provide support and guidance to broad and Remote Access both an audio and video to federal Court Proceedings and ensure these advances and transparency survive future crises and become a fixture of Public Access to judicial proceedings generally. The Reporters Committee has long championed the public constitutional common law rights to access. We have been monitoring the response of federal courts around the country to the covid19 pandemic but as mentioned by the other witnesses this pandemic has changed the daily operations of federal courts across the country as they affect litigants attorneys members of the judiciary and the public that i would note Public Access to judicial proceedings in Court Records is no less important during a crisis. In response to the ongoing pandemic many judicial proceedings typically held in open court have been held remotely. To facilitate Public Access to these proceedings the judicial conference temporarily approved the use of teleconferencing to provide the press and public audio access to civil proceedings. Courts and judges have relied on this guidance to provide Remote Access for the public but is implement the policies in different ways. United states Supreme Court improve Public Access hearing oral arguments by telephone in may 2020 for the first time in the courts history. The public is demonstrated an abiding interest in these proceedings. Within a few hours of the Supreme Court hearing oral arguments in two cases involving the president s tax returns of may 12 it was reported approximately 500,000 people tuned in to the livestream oral arguments. As of yesterday 1. 9 Million People have listened to at least one of the Supreme Courts recorded oral arguments on line compared to the 50 members of the public who normally are in the courtroom. Similarly measures of videos posted by the u. S. Court of appeals for the 9th circuit which livestream video of its oral arguments even before the pandemic have hundreds of viewers. The Reporters Committee urges congress to permit courts to permanently remove barriers for the broadcaster streaming of proceedings in the federal judiciary. Congress should enact legislation to ensure that all federal trials and Appellate Courts have sufficient funding to continue providing live audio and video access to all public proceedings and the courts are able to enact provisions of contrary policies including the judicial conference of cameras in the courtroom policy but this would include passing h. R. 6017 the 21st Century Court acts which would require live audio in its on line archives and the Supreme Court oral arguments along with all federal appellate proceedings. H. R. 5645 the eyes on the courts courts and the 2020 require cameras to all Supreme Court and prosecuting courts and last but not least h. R. 642 the court access amid the pandemic act which would require a new oral arguments in Circuit Court and District Courts be made public in real time we had video teleconferencing and telephone conferencing and be permanently archived on the internet. All Supreme Court justices have expressed concern in the past that live audio and video could potentially hurt the sanctity of the court the Supreme Court is unique and need not follow trends with Public Access and lower court. The recent demand for shaving of the courts oral arguments last month clearly show the American Public wants to know about its tremendously important part. According to recently released polls 83 of americans supported regular livestream audio of the Supreme Court with nearly 70 calling for all courts to allow cameras in the courtroom. Additionally Public Notice of when remote proceedings will take place and when members of the public can observe them is crucial. We have noticed courts remained consistent in its respect during the covid19 pandemic could uniformity provides such Public Notice and would help move obstacles for members of the press and public exercising their rights to access. In some the Reporters Committee believes increase Public Access to the nations federal courts including the Supreme Court is on balance and an important step to promote accountability transparency efficiency and an informed electorate. I would like to thank the subcommittee for including me in this very important conversation surrounding court access and i looked or to any answering any questions that you may have. Thank you. I understand that we are having some problems with my microphone so we are going to take a pause to see if we can work that out. I must apologize to everyone. I was pretty strict on the 30second tapping with your four minutes and are the second mark for you judge campbell and for you judge fogel but i started slipping with chief Justice Mcconnell and i totally failed with ms. Arash markazi so i apologize. I couldnt help itself. At this time i will take a brief recess so that we can fix our problem here. We will recess briefly. The hearing is back and we will now proceed under the fiveminute rule with questions. I will begin by recognizing myself for five minutes. Judge fogel rule one of the federal rows of civil procedure establishes that the rules must be construed to secure the quote just an expensive determination of that reaction and proceedings end quote. How should those three values animate the federal judiciarys approach to using a virtual come using virtual technologies during the pandemic and beyond . Thank you mr. Chairman. Rule one is the basis of everything else. Thats the way its always been interpreted and all of the other federal rules need to emanate from those core values. My personal view that articulated during the pandemic but hopefully even afterwards if we can use Virtual Technology to honor those values more fully we should. I think the federal judiciary ought to do that and that is really really why it got so interested in this issue because i think this is not necessarily consistent with the institutional conservatism of the federal courts but i think its a tremendous opportunity here. One caveat i have this theory at residual dust justice and the data we have so far is interesting. As chief Justice Mccormack pointed out in some of the proceedings in state courts people actually are happier to appear virtually. We dont have to take a day off of work and they dont have to travel. They can visit Debt Collection cases and things like that gone down enormously because of the availability of virtual proceedings. The federal courts dont do a lot of that kind except in bankruptcy and bankruptcy judges that ive spoken with are very receptive and two ways to expand virtual for many the of the same reasons particular individual bankruptcies. Sometimes Virtual Technology helps because i think we need to be careful and as i say this is not a onesizefitsall situation. There are proceedings where i think honoring the values require some type of a more somber type of situation and several things come to mind that there may be constitutional limits only talk about confrontation in criminal case is that essentially mr. Chairman i think theres tremendous potential here for using modern technology to better the point rulemaking. Thank you. Chief Justice Mccormack would you respond to the same question . Thank you very much. There are hard questions and i think i relate everything that judge fogel seven there are definitely areas where there are conflicting values that we are going to have to start thinking about and talking about with stakeholders and work earn our way through. There are some proceedings for way cheap remote platforms will not be a pro the court just issued in a unanimous opinion this week holding that a witnesss testimony in a criminal trial by skype violated the defendants sixth amendment right. There will be proceedings that are not appropriate for remote platforms but as Everybody Knows a lot about we do a specially in courts are not jury trials or criminal jury trials. The highvolume dockets especially the ones that we are going to see a lot of in the three months because of backlogs like evictions and other District Court cases will be not only appropriate for platforms that will increase limitation. Judge fogel is correct we have seen jurisdictions that argue remote platforms at much higher rates of participation which obviously enhances the firstorder values that you are asking about. How do we proceed in those more difficult cases is something we will all have to think about her work through. We want to be able to give people action because even if wit against have a right to insist on an inperson participation there will be some that are interested in waiting that so what we are working on michigan is to give people options. We have just finished a jury trial buys them that was a hypothetical jury trial. We had real lawyers and a real judge acting in those roles but we had a number of our staff playing the criminal defendant. We had volunteers and family members and we did it so we could develop us practices for the litigants who are interested in proceeding that way rather than waiting until they can do it safely. There is a lot to figure out but i want to come back to where he started which is it was a terminus opportunity to figure out how we do a lot of what we can do better more transparently and with more accessible at the. Thank you. My time has expired and i now call upon my colleague congresswoman roby for five minutes. Again thank you to all of her where does this for being with us today. Judge campbell during this pandemic there has been an increase in technology and the use of technology and our federal courts and the general public alike. However there are valid security concerns surrounding Technology Platforms such as zoom. If you will tell the committee how federal courts in the judicial conference worked to address security concerns . Thank you congresswoman. There has been a significant increase in the use of video and Audio Technology during the pandemic and i agree with judge fogel and chief Justice Mccormack that its a very valuable learning experience and the fact the federal courts went to congress and asked for the ability to use audio and video proceedings in criminal cases where it wasnt authorized under the existing rules. I have concern about the security of videoconferencing platforms, technical experts that the Administrative Office of the courts have worked with i. T. Specialist specialists in each of the individual districts and Circuit Courts. They have embedded different video platforms for security, for the ability of outsiders to have and it ministered up offices made recommendations in local courts as to which kinds of video platforms were the most secure. I think the courts have been using those. I think the Technology Platforms are improving as the pandemic goes on but we have been very conscious of security and the Technology Experts within the federal courts have been quite active in ensuring that the tools that are used are secure. Has again been, since then another jurisdiction may be equipped to administer Remote Technology. Again, ive already mentioned that some may have unreliable connection or poor access to quality internet. So will give you an opportunity as well to weigh in on this issue. Just he thought in response to that congresswoman. We have heard of how hard the fact that there are jurisdictions for the ability to connect to the necessary locations has been limited by technology. They have heard is particularly true where federal detainees are housed in a book jail facilities or detention facilities that have not had videoconferences capability have limited telephone capability. The course of the work with those facilities, so that the video teleconferencing proceedings in criminal cases could go forward. Progress has been made. But theyre still clear limitations by matters external for the court such as the availability of broadband. The funding available sofacility. I will note that i understand what part of this proceeding focuses on civil cases. Before the pandemic arrived, the judges reason technology in civil cases relatively frequently to conduct hearings for Case Management and oral arguments. Its a very common thing in my court for participants to call into proceedings if they are from out of town. A lot of pre trial working on the civil side was already done by technology. Obviously we are doing a lot more than out and agree with points made made by the speakers already that theres much we can learn from the experience we are having during the pandemic. I would just say, given all of these limitations, weve got to ensure that the courtrooms are ready to reopen for those who may not be able to participate in the very traditional proceedings. He would like to weigh in on that as well. I agree with that. The question of how to reopen rooms and how to conduct proceedings carefully is a very difficult one. A critical one. Every District Court in the United States is in us getting and developing policies and how you bring in 60 people for a jury selection. How you then see the 12 or 14 seat person criminal during that will be together for two weeks and how in the process you keep the jurors safe. How do you limit with a trial that would normally be presenting health risks. Please read the front. Honey determined to for the such criteria for who is allowed in the courthouse. All of those issues are being exported policies are being developed. We want to reopen the courtrooms as soon as possible consistent with Public Health and course are working on the basis of their local circumstances to develop those policies. Ive done over my time and i appreciate information. I would just ask that the subcommittee be kept informed every step of the way about what this looks like. Obviously, it is important for us to know the things that the judiciary is putting into place as relates to best practices and understanding the urgency as well. In these cases continue to backlog and thank you for letting me go over. Thank you. Nasa tenement from arizona for five minutes. Is much frosting is critically important hearing. Thank you for the outstanding witnesses with us today. Covid19 has presented challenging hardships or federal Court Operations and maintaining fair and equitable access for Justice System. It continues to be of utmost importance. I commend the judiciary from being animated in its response. However, we must be vigilant as the courts are considering other adaptations are affecting underserved communities. One of these critically important communities are People Living in Indian Country. My home state of arizona, is fortunate to have a significant native american presence. The 21 top tribal nations in our state. Sadly, covid19 hasnt these communities hard. For example the Navajo Nation has one of the highest per capita rates in the country. Its resulted in confused lockdowns. The high infection rate, limited Internet Access to pascrell excess. Im concerned they are experiencing unique difficulties in accessing the federal courts. Given the significant presence in the Indian Country, is a federal presence, i asked specifically how the judicial system is accounting for challenges present their read on to ensure their needs thoughtfully fairly and equitably addressed. I would question for judge campbell. Youve been a judge in arizona for nearly two decades. Presided over a very rising areas. Were fortunate to have you with your expertise some of the roles and practices and procedures for the notice about the committee on federal judiciary covid19 task force, have representatives from important stakeholders. As a test course of the company unroll procedures have tribal representation. Thank you congressman stanton. And for your support in the course of arizona. There is not to my knowledge, tribal representation on the committees within the federal judiciary and oversee the rules of practice and procedure. Those committees consist of federal judges, academics, and practicing lawyers are appointed for a term of years to work on the committees. Im not aware of a native american who was present on those committees. She district judges, court unit executives, rep. Of the federal public defenders, rep. Of the u. S. Attorneys office, rep. Of the u. S. Marshals, and General Services administration. Another task force has reached out and sought input from courts around the country on issues that they are dealing with. As you know, our team just in arizona, is very conscious of Indian Country needs pretty has been communicating with the Administrative Office about those needs. He has developed some innovations for the federal courts to reach out to Indian Country including holding jury trials on the navajo reservation which has happened under his leadership. And course we have a number of court, Federal District judge is a member of the holy tribe. The present unique perspective to report in the federal courts generally so my hope is that the course that deal with native american populations will react invisibly hours news. Now when the federal court system understand those needs and serve them better. Check i would ask you to consider advocating fretting tribal rep. To both the task force and the committee. I think the communities in our country, would be better served if that was his particular for the new unique that the federal courts play in Indian Country and her son around country and one final question for Jeff Campbell or anybody else. What work is being done to make sure the native representatio rn is on the indians rations. In arizona, when we hold jury trials in criminal cases are settled crisis, when you by the state into three different generate districts. We have a Northern Arizona generate district that encompasses the navajo reservation and a number of other native american lands. When an event course in Northern Arizona, civil or criminal matter, injuries drawn from god Northern Arizona area specifically for the purpose of including everyone in that area including native americans presume its difficult and when we have cases arise Northern Arizona, we will have native american jurors read and if there is a needed to increase in participation and to reach out to those communities and encourage participation and that is something that the chief jude snow is doing quite actively. Thank you, mr. Cline is recognized for five minutes pretty. Thank you mr. Chairman. Covid19 crisis has caused many of us to how we perform everyday duties. Teleworking, wearing mass public settings. Ordering essentials online. The way life is changed domestically. Challenges are monumental. I must continue their essential operations while keeping everyone involved safe. My understanding that the Administrative Office of course hassan federal Circuit Courts in response by offering guidance and offering information and for that im very grateful. Leadership role was undertaken during many state courts and federal courts of close courthouses and stopped for singing strength must remain mindful to the rights of those seeking justice. When the wave we have sought to support a system during these times is cares act. As a federal judiciary to connect conferences certain to concerns. And find that trend 20 emergency momentarily affect the functioning federal courts enemy authorize the use of video teleconferencing, or telephone conferencing not reasonably available for criminal proceedings in certain instances. So assist with these changes, cares act appropriated the total of 7. 5 million the federal judiciary to address immediate Information Technology needs and increased testing and treatment cost for the pretrial and probation. 500,000 to the Supreme Court 1 million to the defender services, 6,000,002 federal courts and other Judicial Services to prevent and prepare for and responding to coronavirus. Buspar transference in a government, do remain concerned about the impact that cameras in the courtroom can have on proceedings. However, as an advocate understanding audio, parentheses frame court allow for realtime of their oral arguments etc. This is work where they perform. And have that will remain in place long after the coronavirus case has ended. I think it witnesses for the time today. To discuss the challenges in the coronavirus has caused. I would like to ask judge campbell, due to the pandemic many courts have had to suspend or chop stop direct jury trial. My understanding is that the Judicial Task force for covid19 and the working group to consider how the grand jurys injuries may safely reconvene escorts reopen. Where some of the most considerations as a reit start the grand jury and jury trials. Thank you congressman. Sub that you mentioned produced ten or 12 spaced pages. These are recommendations on the kinds of steps the courts can take to ensure the health and safety jurors when they returned to the courtroom. Its really very detailed. I reviewed it carefully because i had a jury trial scheduled to start next monday. We had postponed it in light of the rising infection rates in arizona is a very detailed description of the measures that should be taken to ensure the jars are not infected when the comfort jury service. Even down to the detailed how many people should be done and an elevator and shoot to put markings on the floor for jurors to stand. And you should put them on the bench in the courtroom for jurors to be 6 feet apart. And use of plexiglass. It is a very detailed document pretty equally important, i believe is that federal courts and state boards as well, be able to assure jurors on the fourth, their health is protected. Summary federal court has been directed to prepare Public Notice. I was about a page and set forth in detail the steps we will take to ensure jury safety clinic and or courthouse. That goes out with every jury summons so jurors know where taking other steps in public and ensure their safety will become. There have been to jury trials held recently. When the Northern District of texas and one in the Eastern District of texas. They were held last week. The procedures followed and the precautions taken have been shared with the federal courts generally we will continue to watch and learn as we go through the process of reading semi jury trials. Thank you. On out recognize the gentleman from california for five minutes. Thank you calling this most important hearing. As i listen to these witnesses, and im reminded of the same justice denied, by delaying justice also thinking back to my experience in government, it usually managed by crisis. Very difficult for government to manage beyond the next day. Also thinking about 911. We never really went back to being the same after 911. As i think about covid19, i suspect and i hope we will not go back to business as usual after covid19 read that being said, visiting about your operation today, essentially assuring that our Court Systems were well and we have due process. The study they were sending about what were doing today and i dont think your branch of government has the luxury time to study the issue. I suspect that right now your local courts at all levels are managing this crisis by adopting by changing. I would say that we dont have the time to study the issue. Our libraries are full studies. Net those studies are concluded, there just put away. Then we run to the next crisis. So i would ask all of you, could you begin to give us a list of those best practices that are being implemented right now that will change for the better, for the court system actually operates predict i also want to say i was delighted to hear that Public Participation and interest in judiciary system is actually gone up. Theres a Silver Lining in this crisis, it is that people are watching proceedings today online. And chief justice mccormick, you mentioned the word, very negative emotions to my psyche. And thinking to myself, probably most markets will look at it courtroom the same way as a dentist. I dont want to go through jury duty, dont want to go near that building. Just like you would with a dentist. So again i ask all of you in general, what a mess practices that youre implementing right now that we can advance on the could be permanent to make sure that we better the way courts operate in the United States. Magmay i. I think i was probably person who emphasized that the most. It is not something that would be done over the years of time and put on the shelf. Then youre quite right that theres an urgency here. But i think that one of the real aspects of the federal courts have is that they have resources to look carefully what theyre doing and producing exactly the type of list of best practices that youre asking for. I dont think it can be done on the side i think it can be done relatively soon. For the type of applied research that the federal courts a very good at. Effective agency that i have the privilege of directing her seven years, federal Judicial Center, that is what it does. Thats one of his two major missions. One of them is education for judges and Court Management and the other is pride research. I think working with the committees on the taskforces the judge campbell, and the rest of the judicial conference, is exactly the type of reflective product that can come out. And i think he can come out in a matter of months rather than the matter of years i think its exactly the type of guidance that we need. When we learned, one of the best practices, what should be and why should we stop doing. This exactly what youre asking youre asking the exactly the right questions and the good news is that the federal courts actually have an ability to do that applied research. So that is what i would say. I also appreciate the question. Its excellent question. A lot of people view the courts like this, not usually. I usually say that when people heard something, dramatic and stressful is happening in their lives, we do have adoptions, people get married that can be fun. But usually something dramatic and stressful, of course treat people. Its a whole different ballgame. What kind of trusting the government. How we treat the 3m the seasonally people who need the cases involved in a severe. It gives us an opportunity, depending on what we do some best practices that we are learning right now, we actually are immediately putting out there, let me refer you to that and they make, that is the running. The Rapid Response technology committee. I dont know if that is the right name. The country. We have already produced a series of best practices, best technology. [silence]. We were trained, to move slowly. We are conservative but we also have cultural and Important Reasons frankly, and yes we are right now having to act like entrepreneurs. It is for the benefit of the people of the country donated to use that to resolve really important cases in the life often without lawyers. The trans parents any, that the accessibility we are saying from remote proceedings the way in which people feel less intimidated more able to participate are easy answers to your questions. I think the harder answer is we have to continue to be capturing those best practices and shari sharing. Thank you for the question. We are working on it. Thank you and we will embark upon a second round of questions. I will begin by asking that noting in the testimony that the courts have taken different approaches to adopting the judicial conferences guidance on providing access to public and the media. What issues have members of the press run into under this disparity court by court approach. Thank you the question. So at the beginning of the covid19 pandemic, merit seeing some disparities with reporters noting how they can receive Public Notice of remote proceedings. Whether that be a link sent to boston on the website, which would be most publicly acceptable. Or trying to figure out how outside of being noted on the docket, to call into these proceedings. There were some instances where in the federal my believe it was at the District Court level there was Remote Access made available for the attorneys and the deacons. But members of the public mind are in different thinking. Also in response to representatives question. This would be a best practices an opportunity to make notice more widely available. This is something as easy as posting a link on the front of a course for the website to make sure the members of the public and members of the press are able to access it that would also help increase Public Participation. Weve also seen as an opportunity for longterm investment. Congress has an opportunity to provide support and guidance through funding, maybe through the appropriations process to allow all levels of the federal courts to broadcast live stream the proceedings were also making notice more widely available. I would note the concerns for her district and the lack of access to broadband. I appreciate and i understand that concern. Potential fix there would be the ability to his and they cant stream video payment stream audio without the access to broadband. They provided a dialin number giving as of the press and the public the opportunity to be able to access the proceedings. During remote times and as courthouses start to reopen, this would help prevent someone is a symptomatically coming into the courtroom. The still access the proceeding from home. So i think the real opportunity seemed to move forward especially on the notice front. Owen also mentioned, i know a couple of people of mentioned studies. We can look at some of the courts are doing now. All of the Circuit Court except for the sick circuit have live audio available as of yesterday. So moving forward, we can see what work applies to the audio and start to get incremental steps from there. Thank you. We are only limited by the imagination the Judicial Branch of this request for funding for any particular programs that we deem appropriate for the Judicial Branch. Were only limited from the terms of the imagination. Chief justice mccormick, if you would address this issue. A message to the public with the Supreme Court if it decided to stop broadcasting is proceedings. And what message with the courts and event expanded Public Access by allowing live video not just audio of its proceedings. If i might impose upon you chief justice mccormick. Think of that question. I am on record as being in favor of Live Streaming proceedings at the Supreme Court as well as in the court of appeals. Minus been Live Streaming for many years. Long before i joined it. The reason we do it is to make space and people who live far away but are citizens of our state, have been argue the rights to see what the court is doing and how theyre doing it. And to me, is trust it instills trust and confidence in a wrench. As i said, its all we have. As a transparency is a way to build that. And i think it is only increases the confidence in the courts work. 100 percent of the time, 50 percent of the people dont like our decisions. We usually end up disappointing everybody by the end of the term. But if we believe that we are operating fairly. That we are listening. When treating everybody with respect and dignity. And whether it is their payment outcome or not. That is a big benefit of transparency. I will say that some of the cases we hear in the lifestream, i think the only person watching is my dad. And he just wants to see me. He lives in North Carolina made so they dont all have the same amount of Public Interest. They should all have the same acceptability. Everybody who lives in our state. And frankly Everybody Loves anywhere. Another said, i believe it builds trust and confidence in the work that the courts do. And that is the whole ballgame. Thank you. Think it chairman. I would echo the sentiments of the chief justice read i think the Supreme Court, if they do decide to extend the video or even life audio access and promotes a message of transparency is to extend the gains of the transparency that has been made due to the situation of this pandemic. Increasing Public Access is something thats been extremely important to help promote accountability and promote transparency. Think he also send a message of strengthening our democracy as a chief justice mentioned. Being able to view these proceedings or listen to them via audio, would send a strong message that the public does have an interest in what the court is doing. We have repeatedly said there is no demand for this. Or they dont believe the people would really understand this part of the process. With oral argument. And we have seen from the ten or oral are humans live streamed in may, that simply isnt true. People want this access. They want to know what the nations highest court is doing. It helps better inform their decisions moving forward and have them decide to trust and build confidence in the judiciary. Thing is very important moving forward they continue to extended this access. Public theyve also made comments about lawyers potentially grandstanding. I didnt want audio. Under the ohio Supreme Court is also been Live Streaming broadcasting their oral arguments. And only happens once in 15 years the lawyer has grandstanding in the justices told him to stop and they havent had a problem since. And we can look back on the audio files of those ten pieces in may that there was no grandstanding. There were just people talking to these cases and that was easy to understand the American Public. A really builds trust the federal judiciary. Ill now recognize the gentle lady from alabama. It. Thank you all three testimonies here today and your willingness to answer our questions. Judge campbell, the judicial conference of the United States submitted a letter to members of congress on april 28 of this year. With a long list of legislative proposals, and in response to covid19, when very specifically submitted judicial Conference Institute convert temporary into permanent. So can you briefly discuss this proposal describe i would help the federal judiciary response to the ramifications of the pandemic and its chairman i would just note this is already part of the record. Yes and thank you. There are two parts to that request submitted in may. One part focuses on bankruptcy court. We are expecting there will be a surge in bankruptcy filings because of the unfortunate economic outfall of the pandemic. There are 14 temporary bankruptcy positions identified on the courts and we request that those be made to permanent positions that will allow additional and permanent Additional District where they are needed. I also temporary federal judgeships which some have been temporary for a long time. My district has been temporary for 17 years. In those typically are extended one year at a time. In the course into no letter they will be extended or not. If not extended, the judge retires, then the position is not the old. Sing the course with demanding dockets face the prospect of actually losing judges. In the temperate judge. That is why we have asked that in these areas of training, districts their magazine bankruptcy course that will be very busy, the congress may permit these judgeships which currently are only temporary. I appreciate that pretty theres other legislative proposals in this letter. I want to give you an opportunity if there is something that you would like to highlight for us in the time i have remaining. But again thank you very much for your testimony. All of you here today. Thank you. I dont think i will attempt to identify any particular of the 17 proposals that are wide range of issues. Theyve all been developed in consultation with courts around the country. A number of them affect several public defenders and their needs. I would simply request this please review and consider all the conference considers all that important. I would like to add one point in response what congressman asked a few minutes ago about best practices. I mentioned there is a location on the federal courts intranet or course can go for information and one of these categories of information on that intranet, a court orders in local practices. And if a judge goes there were district goes there on the internet, the judge can find literally hundreds of orders from courts around the country that reflect the best practices in the Administrative Offices also trying to synthesize information from course and get this out. Theres a very conscious effort to learn from each other and to learn from the state courts as we go through this unique time. Thank you mr. Chairman, i yield back or use my and i recognize the gentleman from virginia for five minutes. I just want to thank the witnesses for participating dont have any further questions at this time. The gentleman from california is now recognized. Thank you night first of all, wanted to clarify, we talked about access to the courts. In the chief justice mccormick, you mentioned being on the record as supporting video Live Streaming of your courtrooms and they feel courts. What about the lower courts. Do you feel the same way about having those live streamed. I do. There should not be exceptions. There are exceptions right now in public courtrooms for when we are when we do not provide access. Protecting witnesses who need protection. We have a process reviewing in a courtrooms throughout the country. We can do in our virtual courtrooms as well which i did. Before routine matters, Live Streaming and courtrooms including trial courtrooms should be norms. It builds confidence. You can go on the michigan supreme website you can click on the virtual courtroom directory and you can on any county in the state. See which courts are operating and then click on the live feed. And watch those courts operate. Family members and lily kids who cant make it to court can do it. It is in my view, really important to build confidence in the work that this branch does and like i said, ive 11th when we build confidence in our work we are really building trust. This english into you judge campbell. What about local course having those proceedings online. Do you advise it. Did that work. Thank you. You know its been the policy of the judicial Conference Since the mid 1990s, not a live broadcast District Court proceedings. Theres actually a federal criminal procedures that addresses that as well. Policy of the judicial conference has been to allow the court of appeals to make decisions on what they will live stream. And as indicated a few minutes ago, many of them do that is a routine basis. Most of them are doing this now during the pandemic. Medicine the policy and remains the policy of the judicial conference. I think it is also absolutely true though they are learning from the pandemic. The judges are doing work. The video and teleconferencing proceedings. And i agree that there is much to be learned from that process. But the policy that exist now us not to allow broadcasting from trial courts. Unmute. Thank you very much. I was district judge 20 years. Before that i was on the state and california were the fault was the opposite. Where everything was presumed to be open. And capable of being transmitted. Frankly, i think it may particularly reflection with what to just sent. I think there are situations where you have to be careful. Privacy, cooperating witnesses and things like that was just not appropriate. But in general, i think the sunshine is a good thing. I think federal courts have been forced to do something which is outside of their comfort zone as a result of covid19. I think thats exactly the type of things they should take the opportunity to think about again. In the outcome, it is up to them to decide what policy they think makes sense. Now we have actual data as to what was occurred when these proceedings have been opened. And think it is this something that should be looked at and left it upon thought about in of what we do point forward. I would echo the sentiments made by my fellow witnesses. Should be a presumption of openness here. I agree there would be situations in which District Court would need to take into consideration, privacy of witnesses. They can also keep broadcast restrictions in place. To stop the broadcasting of video access. But i would note it was a Pilot Program put forward by the judicial conference and 14 district course or four years of living 2011 2015. The results of those show that a lot of the participating judges and attorneys actually favored the Court Proceedings. More than 70 percent. In the in the Pilot Program, more were in support of cameras in the courtroom and most judges and attorneys said they would be in favor of permitting video recordings at the proceedings. We know that in our written testimony that we submitted. Another thing to note that the District Court level, with a program was that many judges and attorneys were actually quite surprised that cameras were as unobtrusive as they were. Some of the foreman, i dont see any problem with increasing access to at that level. But i would ask that they provide that support and guidance with the judicial conference to possibly amend the cameras in the courtroom policy. Piece of the the witnesses had mentioned in your rep. Have mentioned we are not going back to our old normal. This is the new normal. Sunlight is the best disinfectant regardless of pandemic or not we would advocate that you do what is most acceptable for the market people. Thank you. Jerry will now recognize the gentleman from ohio for five minutes. Think the chairman. And i think the witnesses for being with us. If not in person, at least through this opportunity of today. Federal courts have handled their work during the pandemic that is kept most at home, provides a great opportunity to raise the importance of allowing cameras in the courtrooms. And to maintain or improve Public Access to the Court Proceedings. Burning in my tenure as a member of congress and a member of this committee, i introduced legislation, the sunshine in the courtroom act. And in fact, i believe along with now senator Chuck Schumer on this community we introduced it together and we will introduce it with other members of the years. It wouldve allowed it at all judges to permit audio and visual coverage of Court Proceedings and all federal courtrooms at the discretion of the judge. The judge did not want to do it he didnt have to happen. But overall, would be available. In this congress, chairman nadler introduced hr 5645 this important legislation will require that cameras be allowed in all Supreme Court and federal tele Court Proceedings. Plus presiding judge determines the permitting cameras would violate the due process right to party or would otherwise not be in the interest of the justice. We as members of congress had our proceedings on cspan for example, street streamed on youtube and on each committee website. Fact is very subcommittee hearing today, is being streamed right now. Most of our official actions can be reviewed by anyone and that would include justice. In my opinion, the same should be true of our federal judiciary. While all of our activities are recorded and preserved for and viewed by the public, federal judges who judge our decisions largely do so in private. And this despite the fact that nearly all of the states including my state of ohio, and ill cameras in their courtrooms without incident or spectacle although there are lots of predictions early on in all the terrible things that would happen if and for the most part they have not happened. I think the federal courts, should be brought into the modern world as well. An informed essential to our constitutional systems of checks and balances been i think the market people deserve an opportunity to see how our court system works just as they can of the proceedings before his body. I would like to ask justice mccormick, manatee for justice, i understand for the period between april 1st and june 1st, trial courts in your state although over 35000 meetings on zoom, totaling more than 200,000 hours of hearing. How has that worked for those proceedings and how of the course in michigan to address security concerns for example. Thank you for the question. And thank you for your work on transparency in our branch. I share your concerns. I believe that when the public sees the courts marking. It builds confidence even if they dont like the particular outcome. They will understand it. And respect it. As a whole ballgame. In michigan, our lives trimming of thousands of hours have gone extremely well. We are collecting information from litigants. There are number of justices who have been able to keep almost current in the dockets as a result of the Remote Technology platforms. Litigants report and really appreciating the opportunity that does platforms gives them to feel and being treated with dignity and respect. In which we know underscores public trust and the outcomes even when another favorite outcomes. And they are overwhelmingly happy with the efficiency. A lawyer can appear in a courtroom all in one morning they can do that pretty. I dont mean to get you off but i have about 26 a pretty good just go to the real quickly. As they would you favor this type of legislation allowing the federal courts have cameras and ac nodding. By one. In my personal capacity, i would. Then a position to make a discretionary determination is whether it make sense the particular case but i dont think they should be precluded from doing it. It. About the other two. If the other two would way and we would welcome it. As you know, it is the policy not to broadcast proceedings from trial courts. Although some in the fields do so in are permitted doing this been a considered judgment about very Diverse Group on the judicial conference remains conference policy at this time. Final witness would they like to weigh in. Absolutely. We would welcome that legislation. We specifically do mentioned in our testimony in addition to legislation to require cameras in the Supreme Court and also advocate for 21st century course act pretty cosponsored by the chair. Requiring the live audio of the Supreme Court. Not only in the oral arguments that in the readings as well. And also creating a live audio archive. Along with hr, amongst the pandemic act which would require in the course being made public. And also providing guidance as part of the judicial conference to a possible amendment to that camera the courtroom a policy to allow broadcasters and streaming the District Courts. Is been said that sunshine is the best disinfectant tent i tend to share that point of view. Thank you for that indulgence and i healed back. With that we will conclude todays hearing. It thank you to the palace for your appearance today. That objection, all members will have five legislative days to submit additional written questions for the witnesses or additional materials with a record. And hearing is adjourned. [background sounds]. With Police Reform, and the coronavirus continuing to affect the country, watch our live unfiltered coverage of the governments response. Briefings from the white house, congress, governors and mayors from across the country updating situation. And from a campaign 2020 trail, join the conversation everyday are live all in berlin, washington journal. And he missed any of our live coverage of the watch anytime demand. Cspan. Org. What is on the go with a free cspan radio app. Soap what he meant by not working, this is not anybodys fault, what we are dealing with right now is communities spread in context a substantial proportion of the people getting infected. They do not know they are infected predict or not symptomatic. The classic paradigm of identification, isolation and contacted tracing to actually contain that. It is very difficult to make that work under those circumstances. He superimposed upon that, the fact that even with identification isolation and contacted tracing, both in them the dots are not connected. If you go on the phone and talk to some of these people in the communities we find that a lot of it is of a phone. And what is done by phone, maybe half of the people dont even want to talk to one and they think is a government rep. If you live in the community that is mostly brown or black, youre in a different situation. Maybe 70 percent of them dont really want to talk to you. You can identify a contact but you dont isolate them because you dont have the facility to isolate them. That is what is not working. So over going to do we are doing it would be hearing about this, flitting the area of the community to get a feel for what is out there, particularly among the a symptom attics. So in other words, its a paradigm shift. Because we are done with young people, people who are going to be asymptomatic and people were getting infected and community setting. Not an outbreak sitting will you know who to identify isolated contacts tracing. And that is what i meant. Vice president pence along with doctor found she and other members of the Coronavirus Task force on briefing the rising cases across several states. Questioning, and eight eastern on cspan. Were taking your calls live on the air, on the news of the day and discussing policy issues that impact you. Coming up saturday morning, Public Opinion and political analyst, discusses the coronavirus pandemic in shaping Public Opinion. Also the blazing project very treatment talks about his role in changing policing in new jersey. In the effectiveness of community policing. Rc spans washington journal, live at seven eastern on saturday morning. Be sure to join the discussion the Facebook Comments Text Messages and tweets. Sunday at 2 00 p. M. Eastern about to become a former National Security advisor to president trump, john wilson in his book, where it happened. On his time in the trump administration. And sunny and 3 30 p. M. Eight offering on his book, forgot country the christian case for trump. And sunny and 9 00 p. M. Eastern on afterwards. Author on this book five days about the 2015 baltimore uprising following the death of freddie great breeze interviewed by the most senior fellow. Watch book tv sunday at 2 00 p. M. At 3 30 p. M. And 9 00 p. M. Eastern. Cspan2. The u. S. Conference of mayors held a working Group Meeting on thursday on Police Reform and racial justice. Former Philadelphia Police commissioner and Washington Dc Police chief, charles ramsey, said it was time to get back to the basics and Police Reforms. This is an hour. Good afternoon. Let me first over the logistics before we get