The US federal judiciary is considering a limited change to its decades-old ban on broadcasting criminal trials, potentially allowing crime victims and their families to follow court proceedings remotely when attending in person is not possible.
The proposal was discussed at a meeting of the US Judicial Conference’s Advisory Committee on Criminal Rules in Boston. The panel is examining whether a narrowly defined exception could provide victims with remote access without compromising defendants’ rights or the integrity of criminal proceedings.
The issue marks a shift from the judiciary’s earlier position. In 2024, the committee rejected a broader proposal from media organizations seeking to lift restrictions on cameras and broadcasts in federal criminal courts.
A Longstanding Ban Under Review
Federal criminal proceedings have largely remained off-limits to television and audio broadcasts since 1946. Although many state courts permit televised trials, federal judges have maintained stricter limits, citing concerns over witness privacy, juror protection and the potential impact of broadcasting on fair trial proceedings.
The federal judiciary has gradually expanded remote access in other areas. Since the COVID-19 pandemic, courts have permitted remote audio access in certain civil and bankruptcy matters, provided testimony is not being taken. Criminal cases, however, have continued to face tighter restrictions.
The latest review could open the door to a limited exception, particularly for victims who cannot travel to the courthouse.
A Victim’s Family Member Highlighted the Problem
The proposal gained momentum after US District Judge Edmond Chang of Chicago raised concerns about the restrictions in a narcotics-related case last year.
Chang found that existing rules prevented him from allowing the mother of a victim who had died from an overdose to listen remotely to a sentencing hearing. The woman was living in Arizona, and both sides in the case supported giving her access through a closed-circuit connection.
Despite that agreement, the court lacked the authority under the existing rules to grant the request.
The case illustrated how the broadcasting ban can affect victims’ families, particularly when distance, financial limitations or other circumstances make attending hearings in person difficult.
Chang subsequently suggested changing the rules to permit victims and certain third-party representatives to watch proceedings remotely, including hearings related to bail.
Congress Has Already Created Limited Exceptions
Federal law has previously allowed remote viewing of criminal proceedings in specific cases involving victims.
The 2002 9/11 Victims Access Act enabled victims to watch proceedings against Zacarias Moussaoui, the only person convicted in a US court in connection with the September 11, 2001, al Qaeda attacks.
A second exception came through the Lockerbie Victims Access Act, enacted in 2024. The legislation permits victims and family members to follow remotely the criminal proceedings scheduled for 2027 in Washington against a former Libyan intelligence operative accused of constructing the bomb that destroyed Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, in 1988.
These laws provide a precedent for limited remote access while leaving judges with the authority to protect the rights of defendants.
Wider Questions Remain Unresolved
Mary Jo White, a former chair of the US Securities and Exchange Commission, has been appointed to lead the committee’s subcommittee examining the proposed changes. The panel was formed under the leadership of Senior US District Judge Michael Mosman of Oregon.
White said the subcommittee plans to meet in November to examine the scope of any possible exception. Its discussions will also consider whether relatives of defendants should receive similar access to court proceedings.
Another question is where remote viewers should be permitted to watch. One option under consideration is requiring victims who live outside the state where a trial is taking place to access the broadcast from their local federal courthouse.
Any proposed change is likely to include safeguards governing who can watch and under what circumstances.
White also stressed that remote access would not necessarily be guaranteed in every case. Existing legislation allows judges to prohibit broadcasts when necessary to preserve a defendant’s right to a fair trial.
For now, the committee is weighing how to give victims and their families a greater opportunity to witness criminal proceedings while retaining the restrictions federal courts consider essential to a fair and impartial judicial process.
