The rapid progress of technology is evident in nearly every new thing Americans touch these days, but somehow, in the clamor for innovation, American courtrooms have been slow to modernize.
While some judges use streaming services and offer online conferencing, video recording in courtrooms has been prohibited, with few exceptions, for nearly 75 years. Cellphone policies have varied. Recently, however, with “smart glasses” — which look like normal eyeglasses but have built-in computer technology — making their way into the hands and onto the faces of court watchers, New York State has taken the unprecedented step of banning them in courtrooms. The blanket ban, the first of its kind, affects all 1,240 state, county, town, and village courts.
In a one-page memo sent to courts on July 1, Justin A. Barry, executive director of the New York State Unified Court System, said that “the reason for this prohibition is to ensure that individuals cannot surreptitiously record court proceedings in violation of the New York State Civil Rights Law and applicable court rules.”
The ban went into effect on July 20.
As technology has evolved, courtrooms have had to keep pace with media demands, starting with a 1930s ban on photography, and then a 1950s law prohibiting the recording of court proceedings. After a brief flirtation with courtroom recording in the 1980s, the state upheld the ban.
At the Arthur J. Cromarty Court complex in Riverhead last month, a sign was posted indicating that smart glasses would not be allowed in the buildings. While those courtrooms do allow cellphones, they do not permit recording of any kind, video or audio.
The media may apply for special consideration to take still photos inside some courtrooms, but ultimately, a judge will decide on the terms.
Smart glasses, the latest in wearable tech, offer users the ability to record and search. Only a small light at the corner of the frame indicates that the glasses are recording.
According to the Meta website, “smart glasses are regular-looking eyewear with discreetly integrated glasses technology. At a glance, these glasses look like normal sunglasses or prescription glasses, but inside, they include tiny speakers, microphones, a lightweight camera, or even a small display that sits within your field of view.”
The smart glasses manufactured and sold by Meta are also enabled with A.I., which “actively assist and respond to you in real time with a simple voice prompt.”
A service provided online gives users the ability to disable the light, making recording practically undetectable in Ray-Ban or Oakley frames. The service damages and blocks the light so wearers can record without others knowing. (Meta says it will remotely disable any glasses that have been tampered with.) Local schools have not as yet restricted the use of smart glasses. Adam Fine, superintendent of the East Hampton School District, said this week that while there has been word from the governor’s office that students’ use of tablets may be restricted in future, no such reports have been made on smart glasses.
Mr. Fine called it a “very fluid situation.”
Some regard the court ban as a slippery slope, noting that while personal identity needs to be protected, court cases where recording has led to leaked information are essentially nonexistent.
In a Forbes magazine article published last month, the author described the downsides of prohibiting this new tech, which she argues may outweigh the good.
The problems, she wrote, “extend far beyond people being unable to capture audio and video. Increasing numbers of people are using the glasses to translate other languages or provide closed captioning for conversations, and blanket bans will disproportionately hurt non-native English speakers and people with hearing loss. If someone is providing complicated testimony, having it transcribed and able to read from the glasses could also be beneficial, especially if they are being questioned about matters that are technical or deeply emotional.”
(In East Hampton Town Justice Court, a translator is always available for Spanish speakers and judges have a phone-in system for translators for other languages. In court last month, a Turkish-language translator was called upon twice for separate defendants.)
Town Justice David Filer said this week that he has yet to see any of the smart eyewear in local court but that signs in English and Spanish warning of the ban have been posted in the entry areas of the courthouse.
How this will play out in the long term remains to be seen. According to the Meta website, “This is just the beginning. As A.I. glasses evolve, they’re becoming a natural extension of ourselves — enhancing the way we experience the world while staying stylish and connected.”
