History of Cameras, Broadcasting, and Remote Public Access in Courts

The policy, adopted in 1990, generally prohibited the broadcasting of proceedings in federal trial courts. It stated:
"A Judge may authorize broadcasting, televising, recording, or taking photographs in the courtroom and in adjacent areas during investitive, naturalization, or other ceremonial proceedings. A judge may authorize such activities in the courtroom or adjacent areas during other proceedings, or recesses between such other proceedings, only:

(a) for the presentation of evidence;
(b) for the perpetuation of the record of the proceedings;
(c) for security purposes;
(d) for other purposes of judicial administration; or
(e) in accordance with pilot programs approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States."

At its March 15, 2016 session, the Judicial Conference received the report of the CACM Committee, which agreed not to recommend any changes to the Conference policy at that time. The Ninth Circuit Judicial Council, in cooperation with the Judicial Conference authorized the three districts in the Ninth Circuit that participated in the cameras pilot (California Northern, Washington Western, and Guam) to continue the pilot program under the same terms and conditions to provide longer term data and information to CACM. The following policy for cameras in trial courts remained in place: 

A judge may authorize broadcasting, televising, recording, or taking photographs in the courtroom and in adjacent areas during investitive, naturalization, or other ceremonial proceedings. A judge may authorize such activities in the courtroom or adjacent areas during other proceedings, or recesses between such other proceedings, only:

1) for the presentation of evidence;
2) for the perpetuation of the record of the proceedings; 
3) for security purposes; 
4) for other purposes of judicial administration;  
5) for the photographing, recording, or broadcasting of appellate arguments; or 
6) in accordance with pilot programs approved by the Judicial Conference.

When broadcasting, televising, recording, or photographing in the courtroom or adjacent areas is permitted, a judge should ensure that it is done in a manner that will:

1) be consistent with the rights of the parties, 
2) not unduly distract participants in the proceeding, and
3) not otherwise interfere with the administration of justice.

In March 2020, the Judicial Conference authorized a two-year audio streaming pilot project to evaluate live audio streaming of civil and bankruptcy proceedings of public interest. The pilot was later extended for an additional year and ended on March 31, 2023. A significant finding of the pilot was that there were limited technical or administrative challenges related to livestreaming or making streamed recordings available publicly.

In March 2020, the Judicial Conference approved a recommendation of the CACM Committee, the Executive Committee, acting on an expedited basis on behalf of the Judicial Conference approved a temporary exception to the cameras policy to allow a judge to authorize the use of teleconference technology to provide the public and the media audio access to court proceedings while public access to federal courthouses generally, or with respect to a particular district, was restricted due to health and safety concerns during the COVID-19 pandemic. This exception ended on Sept. 21, 2023.

At its September 2023 session, the Judicial Conference adopted the CACM Committee’s recommendation to amend the cameras policy effective Sept. 22, 2023. The new policy permits a judge presiding over a civil or bankruptcy non-trial proceeding, in the judge’s discretion, to authorize live remote public audio access to any portion of that proceeding in which a witness is not testifying.