Audio Streaming Pilot

The Judicial Conference of the United States, the national policy-making body for the federal courts, authorized a two-year pilot program in March 2020, and later extended the pilot for an additional year. It was administered by the Judicial Conference’s Court Administration and Case Management (CACM) Committee and the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. The pilot program, national in scope, studied the feasibility of livestreaming audio of various proceedings in these courts. The pilot ended March 31, 2023.

The CACM Committee adopted the following guidelines for the pilot program.

• Guidelines for district courts, the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, and U.S. Court of International Trade
• Guidelines for bankruptcy courts

Under the guidelines, audio of a civil or bankruptcy proceedings involving a matter of public interest may be livestreamed on a court’s YouTube channel if all parties to the proceeding consent and the presiding judge approves. Trials involving live witness testimony, and proceedings involving sealed, confidential, or classified materials were ineligible for livestreaming under the pilot.

The following courts were admitted to participate as pilot courts:

Guidelines for the Audio Streaming Pilot Project

At its March 2020 session, the Judicial Conference authorized a two-year district court pilot program to evaluate streaming live audio¹ of proceedings in civil cases of public interest, and delegated to the Court Administration and Case Management (CACM) Committee the authority to issue and amend guidelines consistent with the parameters of the pilot (JCUS-MAR 2020, p. 9). At its March 2021 session, the Judicial Conference expanded the pilot program to include bankruptcy courts (JCUS-MAR 2021, p. 13-14). At its September 2021 session, the Judicial Conference approved extending the pilot by one year until March 2023 (JCUS-SEP 2021, p. 11). The objective of the pilot is to identify the policy, technical, operational, budgetary, and administrative issues associated with streaming live audio of certain proceedings, which the Committee will consider when deciding whether to recommend an amendment to the Conference’s cameras and broadcasting policy to allow the practice.²

Pursuant to the Judicial Conference’s authorization, the CACM Committee has promulgated the following guidelines for district and bankruptcy courts authorized to participate in the pilot program. The Conference has authorized the CACM Committee to periodically amend these guidelines, as necessary, to assist the pilot participants (JCUS-MAR 2020, p. 9).

Pilot Guidelines for District Courts, the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, and the U.S. Court of International Trade

1. Participating pilot courts must abide by these guidelines as a condition for participating in this pilot program. These guidelines will remain in effect for the duration of the pilot, unless changed by the Conference or the CACM Committee as authorized by the Conference.

2. Only courts designated as pilot courts are permitted to stream live audio of civil proceedings subject to the other requirements set forth herein. 

3. Each pilot court must ensure that participation in this pilot complies with or is otherwise authorized under its local rules. 

4. The pilot program is limited to civil proceedings.  Examples might include oral argument on a motion or a status report related to a consent judgment or ongoing litigation.

5. The following civil proceedings are excluded from the pilot. 

   1. Any civil proceeding involving live witness testimony.

   2. Any civil proceeding involving sealed, confidential, or classified materials.

   3. Any civil proceeding involving jurors or potential jurors, including voir dire and trial.

6. To qualify for live audio streaming under the pilot, a proceeding or the civil case, generally, must involve an issue of public interest. 

   1. Examples of issues of public interest include, but are not limited to: a claim that, once resolved, may impact the public or a discernable group of people (e.g., employees, residents of a city or state, consumers); a case raising issues of public health or safety; a case involving a civil rights claim; a case involving a public entity, agency, or official; a case that has received media attention.

7. All parties to the proceeding must consent to streaming live audio of the proceeding. 

   1. The court may establish a procedure to obtain each party’s consent to stream live audio of a proceeding, including a time frame by which consent must be given.

   2. The court, sua sponte or upon request, may ask the parties whether they consent to streaming live audio of a proceeding.

   3. Consent to live audio streaming of one proceeding in a case shall not be construed as consent to streaming live audio of any other proceeding in that case.

8. The presiding judge in any civil case will retain the ultimate discretion to deny a request to stream live audio of a proceeding and to stop streaming live audio at any point during a proceeding should an issue or concern arise. 
   
   It is not intended that a grant or denial of a request to stream live audio of a proceeding under this pilot be subject to appellate review insofar as it pertains to and arises under these guidelines, except as otherwise provided by law.

9. The live audio of a qualifying proceeding may only be streamed on the court’s YouTube channel. For purposes of the pilot, it is essential that all proceedings are live streamed to the same internet platform.

10. At its March 2022 session, the Judicial Conference authorized participating pilot courts to post audio recordings of livestreamed proceedings to the court’s YouTube page for up to one year following the proceedings, subject to the ultimate discretion of the presiding judge. This authorization is effective for proceedings streamed through the pilot on or after the date of the Judicial Conference’s action, March 15, 2022.

11. The digital audio that is streamed is not the official record of the proceeding.

12. At the end of each month, participating courts must submit to the AO a completed questionnaire (to be supplied by the AO) regarding the number of proceedings that were streamed during the month and detailing any administrative, operational, or technical issues that arose.

Pilot Guidelines for Bankruptcy Courts

1. Bankruptcy pilot courts must abide by these guidelines as a condition for participating in the pilot program. These guidelines will remain in effect for the duration of the pilot, unless changed by the Conference or the CACM Committee as authorized by the Conference.

2. Only bankruptcy courts designated as pilot courts are permitted to livestream audio of hearings subject to the other requirements set forth herein. 

3. Each pilot court must ensure that participation in this pilot complies with or is otherwise authorized under its local rules. 

4. Subject to the exclusions below, bankruptcy pilot courts may livestream audio of a hearing involving a matter of public interest in any adversary proceeding or contested matter. 

   1. Examples of adversary proceedings involving a matter of public interest include, but are not limited to: cases involving public figures or otherwise noteworthy parties; cases raising legal issues of first impression; matters involving environmental clean-up requirements imposed by a government agency; and cases of local or national interest where injunctive relief may be considered.

   2. Examples of hearings in contested matters that may be of public interest include, but are not limited to: first-day, disclosure statement, and confirmation hearings in chapter 11 cases involving very large or notable organizations; chapter 9 municipal cases; chapter 12 family farmer cases; chapter 13 panel hearings; chapter 15 cross-border/international cases; proceedings to determine whether employees will receive pre-petition compensation that is owed.

5. The following proceedings are excluded from the pilot. 

   1. Any hearing involving live witness testimony.³

   2. Any hearing in which the livestream would disclose the contents of sealed, confidential, or classified materials. 

   3. Any hearing involving jurors or potential jurors, including voir dire and trial.

6. Before livestreaming a qualifying hearing in an adversary proceeding, the judge must notify the hearing participants that the hearing will be livestreamed under the pilot and ask whether any participant objects to the hearing being livestreamed.
   
   A pilot court or judge may establish a procedure to ascertain whether any participant objects, including a time frame by which to object. For example, the court may establish a procedure to obtain consent on negative notice, e.g., by including in a notice of a hearing that the court intends to stream the hearing unless a party objects within a certain time period. If no objections are filed, the court could then deem consent, and proceed with streaming the proceeding.

7. At the commencement of a qualifying hearing in either an adversary proceeding or contested matter, the presiding judge must notify the hearing participants that audio of the hearing will be livestreamed.

8. The presiding judge will retain the ultimate discretion to deny a request to livestream audio of a proceeding and to stop streaming live audio at any point during a hearing should an issue or concern arise. 

   1. The presiding judge’s decision is intended to be administrative in nature. It is not intended that a grant or denial of a request to stream live audio of a proceeding under this pilot be subject to appellate review insofar as it pertains to and arises under these guidelines, except as otherwise provided by law.

9. The live audio of a qualifying hearing may only be streamed on the bankruptcy court’s YouTube channel. For purposes of the pilot, it is essential that all proceedings are live streamed to the same internet platform.

10. At its March 2022 session, the Judicial Conference authorized participating pilot courts to post audio recordings of livestreamed proceedings to the court’s YouTube page for up to one year following the proceedings, subject to the ultimate discretion of the presiding judge. This authorization is effective for proceedings streamed through the pilot on or after the date of the Judicial Conference’s action, March 15, 2022.

11. The digital audio that is streamed is not the official record of the proceeding. Courts should continue to maintain the official audio record as they did prior to participation in the pilot.

12. At the end of each month, bankruptcy pilot courts must submit an online survey to the AO regarding the number of proceedings that were streamed during the month and detailing any administrative, operational, or technical issues that arose.

¹ Live audio streaming involves real-time broadcast of audio from a courtroom or virtual proceeding to a media player that is accessible to the public online. Unlike the temporary exemption to the judiciary’s broadcasting policy, which allows a judge to authorize the use of teleconference technology to provide the public and media a way to call or logon to listen to proceedings during the COVID-19 pandemic, the audio streaming pilot will permit courts to transmit audio of proceedings out to the public.  Neither of these policies restrict a Court from using audio or video technology to allow participation by parties or witnesses in matters that are not transmitted out to the public.

² The information gathered during the pilot program also could be used to prepare guidance for courts if an amendment to the broadcasting policy is ultimately recommended to and adopted by the Judicial Conference. 

³ A hearing involving a witness placed under oath solely to confirm proffered testimony is outside the scope of this exclusion and is authorized to be streamed under the pilot.