Save as PDF

Accessibility in the Courtroom: A Legal Imperative

BY TALI THOMASON

Equal access to justice stands as a cornerstone of democratic society, yet for millions of Americans with disabilities, courthouse doors have historically remained partially closed. Today, as courts increasingly embrace both traditional and virtual proceedings, accessibility has evolved from a moral obligation to a legal imperative that directly strengthens court efficiency and upholds the rule of law.

The Legal Foundation

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) establishes clear requirements for courtroom accessibility. Under Title II, state and local governments—including court systems—must ensure that all programs, services, and activities are accessible to people with disabilities.¹ According to the ADA Standards for Accessible Design, courts must provide accessible facilities free from barriers, designate ADA coordinators, and establish effective grievance processes.²

Recent developments have strengthened these requirements. In April 2024, the Department of Justice published new rules requiring state and local governments to ensure their websites and mobile applications comply with WCAG 2.1 AA standards by April 2026.³ This digital accessibility mandate directly impacts court systems as they expand online services and virtual proceedings.

Physical Courtroom Accessibility

Traditional courtroom accessibility encompasses multiple dimensions. The Southwest ADA Center’s court accessibility guide emphasizes that courts must widely publicize ADA notices of rights and maintain compliance with accessibility requirements.⁴ This includes:

  • Physical access: Wheelchair-accessible entrances, seating areas, and witness stands
  • Communication access: Assistive listening systems, sign language interpreters, and accessible document formats
  • Procedural accommodations: Modified court procedures when necessary to ensure equal participation

The Orange County Superior Court exemplifies best practices by designating court-wide ADA coordinators and ADA liaisons at each courthouse to ensure facility compliance with ADA requirements.⁵

Virtual Courtroom Revolution

The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated courts’ adoption of virtual proceedings, creating new accessibility challenges and opportunities. As noted by the American Bar Association, virtual courtrooms enable legal proceedings with participants appearing remotely via video conferencing.⁶

However, virtual accessibility requires specific considerations:

  • Video accessibility: All courtroom videos must include captions, and visual aids must be clear and easily visible
  • Platform compatibility: Remote hearing platforms must support assistive technologies
  • Technical support: Courts must provide assistance for participants with disabilities navigating virtual systems

California’s court system has implemented comprehensive remote hearing protocols,⁷ though the Pew Charitable Trusts research emphasizes the need for designated accessibility coordinators and prominent publication of contact information.⁸

Efficiency Through Accessibility

Contrary to common misconceptions, accessibility improvements enhance rather than hinder court efficiency. The OECD’s 2024 report on measuring and improving access to justice identifies nine key goals for court systems, including streamlining court processes and expanding access to legal assistance.⁹

Research demonstrates that accessible courts operate more efficiently by:

  • Reducing delays: When accommodations are planned and integrated, proceedings flow more smoothly
  • Minimizing continuances: Proactive accessibility planning reduces last-minute postponements
  • Improving case resolution: Better communication access leads to more informed decision-making
  • Enhancing public trust: Accessible courts build confidence in the justice system

Duke Law’s research on improving access to justice emphasizes that “accessible, fair, and efficient justice systems are key to effective governance and the rule of law.”¹⁰

Strengthening the Rule of Law

Accessibility directly reinforces the rule of law by ensuring equal treatment under the law. As the World Justice Project defines it, the rule of law requires a “durable system of laws, institutions, norms, that delivers accountability, just law, open government, and accessible and impartial” justice.¹¹

The U.S. Courts’ analysis identifies high litigation costs and limited accessibility as factors that “make the federal courts less accessible” and “have the potential to skew the mix of cases that come before the judiciary.”¹² By removing accessibility barriers, courts strengthen their fundamental mission of providing equal justice under law.

Current Challenges and Solutions

Despite legal requirements, challenges persist. The Santa Clara University Ethics Center notes that courts have “failed to insure that representation meets acceptable standards” and lack adequate “judicial oversight” for accessibility compliance.¹³

The American Public University’s research identifies financial barriers as “one of the most significant hurdles for people seeking to resolve legal problems,” particularly affecting “marginalized and economically disadvantaged” populations.¹⁴

The Path Forward

The Department of Justice’s strategic plan emphasizes that “equal access to justice also requires transparency, study, and constant evaluation through improved research and data collection.”¹⁵ This commitment to continuous improvement reflects the evolving nature of accessibility requirements.

Courts must embrace accessibility not as a burden but as an opportunity to strengthen their core mission. By implementing comprehensive accessibility measures—both physical and digital—courts can ensure that justice remains accessible to all, regardless of disability status.

Conclusion

Accessibility in the courtroom represents far more than legal compliance; it embodies the fundamental principle that justice must be equally accessible to all citizens. As courts continue evolving through technological advancement and changing social needs, accessibility improvements will remain essential to maintaining efficient operations and upholding the rule of law.

The evidence is clear: accessible courts are more efficient courts, and efficient courts better serve justice. By embracing this imperative, the legal system can fulfill its highest calling—ensuring equal justice under law for every American.

ENDNOTES

1. ADA.gov. “Guide to Disability Rights Laws.” https://www.ada.gov/resources/disability-rights-guide/

2. ADA.gov. “ADA Standards for Accessible Design.” https://www.ada.gov/law-and-regs/design-standards/

3. ADA.gov. “Fact Sheet: New Rule on the Accessibility of Web Content and Mobile Apps Provided by State and Local Governments.” April 8, 2024. https://www.ada.gov/resources/2024-03-08-web-rule/

4. Southwest ADA Center. “Advancing Court Accessibility for Individuals with Disabilities.” November 30, 2023. http://www.southwestada.org/html/publications/Title2/ADA%20Court%20Guide-SWADAC-FINAL.pdf

5. Orange County Superior Court. “ADA | Superior Court of California.” https://www.occourts.org/general-information/ada

6. American Bar Association. “Virtual Courtrooms: What to Know About Them.” Law Practice Magazine, January-February 2025. https://www.americanbar.org/groups/law_practice/resources/law-practice-magazine/2025/january-february-2025/virtual-courtrooms-what-to-know-about-them/

7. California Courts Self-Help. “Remote court hearings.” https://selfhelp.courts.ca.gov/remote-court-hearings

8. The Pew Charitable Trusts. “How to Make Courts Accessible to Users With Disabilities and Limited English Proficiency.” January 29, 2024. https://www.pew.org/en/research-and-analysis/fact-sheets/2024/01/29/how-to-make-courts-accessible-to-users-with-disabilities-and-limited-english-proficiency

9. OECD. “Measuring and improving access to justice in court services.” October 2024. https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2024/10/measuring-and-improving-access-to-justice-in-court-services_d2ee03c8/a8226ccc-en.pdf

10. Duke Law Scholarship Repository. Vapnek, J. “Improving Access to Justice in Developing and Post-Conflict Countries.” https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1060&context=dflsc

11. World Justice Project. “What is the Rule of Law?” https://worldjusticeproject.org/about-us/overview/what-rule-law

12. U.S. Courts. “Issue 1: Providing Justice.” https://www.uscourts.gov/statistics-reports/issue-1-providing-justice

13. Santa Clara University Markkula Center for Applied Ethics. “Equal Justice Under Law.” https://www.scu.edu/ethics/focus-areas/more-focus-areas/resources/equal-justice-under-law/

14. American Public University. “Access to Justice Requires Changes from the Legal System.” https://www.apu.apus.edu/area-of-study/security-and-global-studies/resources/access-to-justice-requires-changes-from-the-legal-system/

15. Department of Justice. “Objective 3.4: Expand Equal Access to Justice.” https://www.justice.gov/doj/doj-strategic-plan/objective-34-expand-equal-access-justice

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES:

Harvard Law School Center on the Legal Profession. Mies-Westerveld. “Access to Justice, a multi-layered concept.” June 2023. https://clp.law.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Mies-Westerveld.pdf

SpringerLink. Pleasence, P. “Measuring the Accessibility and Equality of Civil Justice.” https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40803-018-0079-0

ScienceDirect. Ramos-Maqueda, M. “The data revolution in justice.” https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X24003048

Western New England University. Fein, D.E. “Access to Justice: A Call for Progress.” https://digitalcommons.law.wne.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1767&context=lawreview

CTI. “Is Your Court’s AV System ADA Compliant? Here’s How…” https://www.cti.com/is-your-court-av-system-ada-compliant/