* Press release…

The Illinois Supreme Court today issued an order and operational guidelines to help courts statewide resume in-person operations and establish procedures for remote hearings. Since mid-March, the state’s courts have been operating under precautionary measures to minimize the spread of COVID-19 while continuing to conduct emergency and essential matters.

This order is effective June 1 and modifies the Court’s March 17, 2020 order so that each circuit may return to hearing all court matters either in-person or remotely according to a schedule adopted for each county by the chief circuit judge. Remote hearings, which have proven to be successful nationwide, will play a large role in reducing the numbers of people appearing at courthouses and ensuring the safety of court users, staff and judicial officers.

“Our courts around the state have risen to this enormous challenge to continue the Judicial Branch mission to protect the rights and liberties of all by providing equal access to justice, resolving disputes, and upholding the rule of law,” Chief Justice Anne M. Burke said. “The Court realizes that the health crisis is not over, but we must advance justice in a safe and organized manner.”

The guidelines recognize that each jurisdiction is uniquely positioned to address COVID-19 challenges based on local conditions. As noted in the Supreme Court’s May 20, 2020 order, chief circuit judges are authorized to develop plans for resumption of court operations in the circuits. Plans may differ from county to county, but local plans are to continue the use of remote hearings where appropriate. For jurisdictions without the resources to take advantage of these efficiencies, the Administrative Office of the Illinois Courts is exploring options for enhanced support of video conference technology. Multiple trainings on remote hearings have been conducted and more will follow through the Illinois Judicial College and bar associations.

The factors which chief judges may consider in determining whether matters may be safely heard include: deadlines which apply to a case or class of cases; the length of time any applicable deadline has been suspended by order of the Supreme Court or the Circuit Court; information from public health authorities; limitations in court facilities or staffing; and anticipated prejudice to any class of cases as a result of continued delay. Chief judges should understand that local conditions may change, and their plans should contain contingencies in that event.

From the order…

The circuit courts shall continue, to the extent possible, to allow for appropriate social distancing and attempt to reduce the number of persons appearing personally for court appearances.

From the operational guidelines…

All practical measures should be taken within the courthouse and courtrooms to ensure a clean environment and prevent the spread of the virus, including:

1. Within the courthouse, provide hand sanitizer at multiple locations within the courtroom, circuit clerk’s offices, and public spaces.

2. Notify all entering the courthouse that wearing a mask/face covering is required (consistent with current public health requirements). If possible, have extra masks/face coverings on hand if someone arrives at the courthouse without one. Notices to come to court should advise recipients: (1) to bring a mask/face covering, (2) those without a mask/face covering will only be provided one IF they are available, and (3) if you have no mask/face covering and none are available at the courthouse, you may be refused entry. […]

Subject to constitutional limitations, entry into the courthouse should be limited to lawyers and named parties. Self-represented litigants should be allowed to bring one friend or family member with them into the courthouse.

* I replied to the press release with this email…

Hypothetically, if there’s a judge in say, I dunno, Clay County, who has already held one packed hearing with 90 spectators, almost none of whom were wearing face coverings, and is planning to hold another hearing on Friday, what does the Supreme Court intend to do?

That email was sent at 11:15 this morning. I’ve heard nothing back.

I suppose the attorney general could file a motion in Clay County referencing the new order and guidance.