Today is the first day of the 2024-25 Court term. No Supreme Court opinions, and no published Appellate Division decisions, were issued. That is not unusual for the beginning of a new Term. But in a Notice to the Bar dated yesterday but published today, and available here, some new procedures regarding proceedings in the Appellate Division and the Supreme Court were announced that are intended to “enhance the public’s ability to observe Supreme Court and Appellate Division hearings remotely, and to provide easier and expanded access to briefs filed in both courts.” The new procedures take effect tomorrow, September 4.

Ever since January 2005, Supreme Court oral arguments have been livestreamed. Under the new policy, “[e]ffective September 4, 2024, the Supreme Court will post all publicly filed briefs for matters being argued before the Court on the Judiciary’s website. Briefs will be posted at least five (5) days before oral argument. Matters that are confidential (for example, sealed or otherwise excluded from public access) will not be posted.” This change will allow the public, including attorneys and laypeople, to understand better the matters that they can watch being orally argued at the Supreme Court. As long as the procedure exempts cases that are confidential or have confidential aspects, as the policy seems to state, there seems no downside to this change.

More far-reaching are changes at the Appellate Division, where oral arguments have not, to date, been livestreamed and access to briefing has not been easy for those not counsel of record in a particular case. As today’s Notice to the Bar stated, “[a]lso effective September 4, 2024, the Judiciary will begin to livestream oral arguments before the Appellate Division. Like the Supreme Court, the Appellate Division will post publicly filed briefs for matters being argued before the court at least five (5) days before oral argument.”

Again, this is a salutary development as long as confidential matters are exempted. Oral arguments are, in general, open to the public. And as the nearly 20 years of livestreaming experience at the Supreme Court has shown, livestreaming does not disrupt oral arguments or change their character. Fears that counsel would engage in theatrics for the camera have not panned out, and in any event, Supreme Court and Appellate Division jurists have long admonished those counsel who do offer overly dramatic presentations to cease that sort of conduct, as “there’s no jury here.” Increasing access to filed briefs enables anyone interested in a particular case, type of case, or area of practice, to learn more about the matter. The Judiciary is to be commended for taking this step as the new Term begins.