COVID19 GUIDELINES FOR MICHIGAN’S JUDICIARY PAGE 3
Michigan has never faced a challenge like COVID-19. The pandemic is not only taking lives and
battering our economy, but also challenging the strength of our institutions. From day one, our
judiciary has met this challenge with unmatched dedication to public service and an unwavering
commitment to innovation in keeping courts operating and accessible to the public.
By working together, we have addressed immediate concerns regarding how our courts provide
essential services and have ramped up our ability to hear other business in virtual courtrooms.
Now, as responsible stewards of our justice system, we must develop a strategy for returning to full
capacity that works for our 57 circuit courts, 78 probate courts, 107 district and municipal courts,
more than 160 dierent funding units, and 559 independently-elected judgeships. However, we
cannot have 559 dierent plans; our judiciary must have one plan that clearly describes the steps
that must be taken to protect public health while getting our branch of government back to full
speed. Administrative Order No. 2020-14 provides the authority and this document provides the
specic guidance trial courts need to move forward.
While our trial courts must follow this guidance, we understand that each jurisdiction is uniquely
positioned to address local COVID-19 challenges based on proximal concerns and available
resources. As a result, each chief judge must rely on public health information from local
authorities to inform decisions on operational status of their courts. Ultimately, by using the
phased approach provided in these guidelines, courts statewide will return to full capacity on their
own timelines.
These guidelines are designed to assist court leaders in developing a planning and response
cycle driven by local community health data and trends. The process will help facilitate decision
making at the local level to best ensure public health and safety as courts return to full capacity.
These decisions can be made for 30-day or 14-day operating periods (or less), depending on local
circumstances and should be part of a regular planning cycle (see Appendix 1, p. 19).
“Full capacity” in 2020 means something dierent than in prior years and will require a culture
shift in the judiciary based on advancements in court technology and remote work capacity
achieved during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. In that time, the number of Zoom
licenses doubled to more than 1,000 as additional Zoom licenses were distributed to courts
across the state, ensuring virtual capacity in every jurisdiction. Consequently, conducting virtual
proceedings should be a continued xture in court planning. This can mitigate exposure risks,
while increasing court access to the attorneys, the parties, and the public. Although there will be
a time when litigants and the public can return to the courtrooms for more proceedings, we must
change our philosophy and only require attendance when absolutely necessary. Each court’s plan
and denition of “full capacity” should take advantage of technology to the extent possible under
current administrative orders.
INTRODUCTION