Civil Courts and the Coronavirus
Our courts are critical to preventing and responding to various forms of violence. The efficacy of gun safety policies depends on fair, accessible courts crafting orders and making decisions that simultaneously protect due process and lives.
The role that courts play in ensuring that individuals are prohibited from accessing firearms after being issued certain types of restraining orders is just as vital during a pandemic as any other time. Recent news reports of panic buying of guns, often by first-time purchasers, combined with increases in calls reporting domestic violence, highlight how important it is that our courts continue to provide recourse during this pandemic.
As coronavirus sweeps across the country, state and local courts are making adjustments in efforts to provide effective and responsive access to justice. Every state and territory in the US has delayed jury trials in order to maintain social distancing. Many courts are closing, operating with limited hours, or otherwise changing how they operate, including utilizing technology to handle some matters.
The New York State Unified Court System has implemented temporary “virtual court” operations in New York City Criminal and Family Courts. In Washington State, the governor has issued a proclamation addressing protection orders and personal service during this time, noting that the Washington State Supreme Court “directed courts to make use of available technology whenever possible to conduct judicial proceedings and court operations remotely, in order to continue to provide access to justice and to protect the health and safety of the public, court personnel, jurors, litigants, court personnel, and witnesses.”
To minimize unnecessary in person contact, the Washington Supreme Court has further emphasized that personal service requirements (notice about a filing) for protection orders are suspended but importantly has noted, “except as to orders directing the surrender of weapons or removal of the respondent from a shared residence.”
In order to ensure that policies designed to reduce gun violence and save lives are implemented despite these challenges, communities should implement best practices to help reduce the risk to families and communities nationwide. Below are a number of recommendations that can help civil courts begin to solve the challenges presented by this particular time.
Problem: People in need of domestic violence restraining orders may not be able to obtain them, or may be under the misconception that they cannot obtain orders that courts are providing access to on a limited basis.
Solution: During this crisis, some jurisdictions are providing extensions for temporary orders and for existing orders that cannot easily be renewed if hearings are limited or postponed. This is a protective measure that can help decrease risks to protected parties and the community at large. Extensions, however, need to be considered carefully to ensure protected parties still have access to legal remedies while matters are pending.
Problem: In states with extreme risk protection orders (ERPOs)—which temporarily remove firearm access from individuals who pose an elevated risk of harm to themselves or others—maintaining access to the courts is similarly critical. Court proceedings typically provide ERPO respondents with information about how to appropriately and safely relinquish firearms.
Solution: Law enforcement may be able to request that courts issue emergency, limited orders. As an example, California has extended the time limit for temporary restraining orders and gun violence restraining orders (as well as criminal protective orders), all of which include firearms prohibitions, to 90 days to allow the matter to be heard by the court. In the interim, protected parties and those concerned about people at risk should have access to courts to obtain any additional and potentially lifesaving remedies.
Problem: Many civil restraining orders are pursued by self-represented litigants, people who cannot afford or find attorneys to represent them. Advocates and self-help centers or legal assistance programs play an important role in assisting both petitioners and respondents with safety-planning and understanding court procedures, services which may be less available now.
Solution: Courts and communities should make sure these services are maintained as effectively as possible during this time. Programs may be able to provide assistance by phone, through online video conferencing platforms, or through workshops recorded in advance or offered live through a webinar format. Prioritizing these programs as essential community programs can help reduce the possibility of gun violence.
Problem: Domestic abuse survivors may be at even greater risk in their homes than outside of them. Police agencies charged with enforcing stay-at-home orders should be prepared to respond in a supportive manner to assist those seeking safety in ways that may necessitate traveling at this time.
Solution: It is important that local policies allow for travel to escape or address domestic, family, or intimate partner violence. Where possible, courts should provide help on-site for those who must go to court to obtain or extend domestic violence restraining orders. Creative approaches that allow for social distancing, such as providing a dropbox outside the courthouse building itself, can be particularly important and protective.
Problem: Many individuals will be unable to travel to the courthouse due to lack of transportation options or because of safety or health risks.
Solution: A number of jurisdictions are changing their policies and procedures to allow for e-filing or telephonic or video hearings. Where personal service might otherwise be required, courts and policymakers might consider allowing e-service procedures to decrease the risk associated with in-person contact. Similarly, allowing for e-signatures can be helpful to those requesting protective and restraining orders. With these approaches, it is still critical that firearms surrender and relinquishment procedures be implemented to decrease risk and increase safety for families and the broader community.
Problem: Forms typically used for domestic violence restraining orders or ERPOS may not be accessible or appropriate at this time.
Solution: Courts and state agencies should allow information about firearms prohibitions to be entered into state databases rather than continuing to limit formal entry to approved formats. It is critical that these databases be kept up to date during this crisis to ensure ongoing enforcement of lifesaving firearms prohibitions.
Learn More:
COVID-19 Puts Domestic Abuse Survivors at Even Greater Risk
Panic Buying Guns Won’t Keep You Safe During the COVID-19 Pandemic
The Importance of Safe Gun Storage During the COVID-19 Pandemic