(a) Generally allowed at judge’s discretion. To the extent not prohibited by statute, the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Ninth Circuit Judicial Council Policy, or this Local
Rule, judges of this Court may, in their discretion, provide the public with remote video or
USDC Local Civil Rules – Effective May 1, 2026 CIV-65
audio access to civil court proceedings. This applies to proceedings conducted in the
courtroom as well as proceedings where the judge and/or the attorneys are appearing
remotely.
(b) Prohibitions on provision of remote access.
(1) Remote public access will not be permitted where doing so would risk interfering
with the integrity of the proceedings. This includes, but is not limited to, situations
where remote public access would risk infringing on privacy interests, creating
safety concerns, or materially affecting witness testimony.
(2) Remote public video access to civil jury trials is prohibited.
(c) Objections to or requests for provision of public access. Objections to the provision of
remote public access by any party, witness, or person who is a subject of the proceeding,
and requests by members of the public to provide remote public access, will be considered
by the presiding judge. Parties to the case should file objections or requests by way of
administrative motion pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7‐11. Nonparties should make
objections or requests using the form on the Court’s website. Absent a showing of good
cause, any objection or request must be submitted at least 14 days before the proceeding.
(d) No capture or transmission of remote access permitted. Persons with remote access to
court proceedings are prohibited from recording, photographing, or retransmitting those
proceedings.
Commentary
The Judicial Conference of the United States has published a policy against the video
“broadcast” of court proceedings. This appears intended to apply to hearings where
remote video access is provided over a platform such as Zoom. This policy is not binding
on the courts; it is a recommendation that is owed respectful consideration. See 28 U.S.C.
§ 331; Hollingsworth v. Perry, 558 U.S. 183, 193 (2010); see also, e.g., United States v.
Slone, 969 F. Supp. 2d 830, 834– 35 (E.D. Ky. 2013); United States v. Crusius, 2020 WL
4340550, at *6 (W.D. Tex. July 28, 2020). The Judicial Conference policy approves
providing remote audio access to civil and bankruptcy hearings that do not involve
witness testimony. The Judicial Council of the Ninth Circuit, whose policies are binding
within the Circuit, has left the decision about whether and how to provide remote video
access to the district courts.
This Court has carefully considered the recommendation of the Judicial Conference but
has determined based on its own experience from 2020 to 2023 that, except in very rare
circumstances, providing the media and the public with remote video access improves
transparency and confidence in judicial proceedings without having any negative effect
on those proceedings. Additionally, the public’s interest in access to the courts is better
served by providing video access as opposed to audio‐only access, particularly in cases
where the judge and attorneys are also appearing remotely rather than from the
courtroom.
This Court has determined that public audio access to civil jury trials is permissible while
public video access is not. Remote public access to criminal trials (and all other criminal
proceedings) is restricted by Rule 54 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
USDC Local Civil Rules – Effective May 1, 2026 CIV-66
