By: Andrea L. Miller, PhD, JD 

One of the key components of procedural fairness is voice—people want opportunities to share their perspectives and experiences and to know that they’ve been heard. We know from decades of research by Tom Tyler and others that when court users have a chance to tell their side of the story before case decisions are made, they are more likely to trust the courts and believe that the process was fair. In fact, of the four main factors of procedural fairness—voice, neutrality, respect, and trust—voice has the greatest impact on court users’ overall sense of justice. 

Much of the conversation around procedural fairness in the courts focuses on what happens within a case. Experts and practitioners talk about opportunities to implement procedural fairness principles in hearings, pre-trial procedures, pleading and sentencing, mediation, and the unique processes involved in problem-solving courts.  

But courts also have opportunities to give court users voice outside of the courtroom. In recent years, courts have dramatically expanded the ways in which court users can provide feedback about their experiences. Not only does this feedback provide essential information that the courts can use in data-driven decision making to improve their operations and services, this feedback also gives courts users the chance to speak directly about their experiences and feel like they are being heard. In an era when more of the public lacks trust in the courts and views the courts as political entities, these opportunities to give court users voice and promote procedural fairness are invaluable.  

One common approach to getting court users’ feedback about their experiences is through CourTools Measure 1, NCSC’s Access and Fairness survey for court users. In 2022, Measure 1 was updated to equip courts to gather feedback on both in-person and virtual services. Of course, the main purpose of Measure 1 is to help courts identify areas where they can make improvements to promote court users’ perceptions of access and fairness. But the act of conducting the survey itself also promotes procedural fairness by giving court users the chance to voice their thoughts and concerns directly. For more information about the updates to Measure 1, see The New CourTools Measure 1: Lessons Learned from Pilot Tests in the Ohio Courts and Measuring Access and Fairness in Remote Court Proceedings (starting at page 11). For a map of courts implementing Measure 1, see Reports from Courts.  

Courts are also increasingly using surveys and focus groups on a variety of topics, besides issues centered on access and fairness, to give court users voice. Under the Blueprint for Racial Justice, NCSC recently facilitated four learning labs, in which court participants convened to tackle specific challenges with the support of their peers. One of the learning lab sessions is designed to engage court leaders in designing and implementing research projects that use surveys and focus groups to gather court user feedback. In the learning lab, court leaders learn to identify appropriate research questions, collect data needed to better understand their communities, and use information collected to produce actionable insights about how to make the court more accessible, inclusive, and equitable. As learning lab participants execute their projects, they are also hearing appreciation from court users for simply having the chance to share their thoughts. Information and guidance stemming from the learning labs will be released later this year.  

Community engagement is another method for giving court users and community members the opportunity to share their experiences and perceptions. In recent years, more and more courts are using community engagement strategies like open houses, listening sessions, and focus groups to elicit feedback from court users. Although some types of community engagement require more preparation and time to implement than a typical survey does, these methods allow court users to share richer, more detailed thoughts and ideas. For this reason, these types of research strategies also create environments where court users can see directly how representatives from the court are hearing and responding to them. NCSC’s Engage! Toolkit provides a roadmap for bringing communities into conversation with the courts and explains how the process of community engagement builds public trust in the courts through voice. 

Although research and court practice have long recognized the importance of procedural fairness in court hearings, there are other examples of how courts can give court users voice outside of legal proceedings and create opportunities for community members to see that they’re being heard. It is an exciting time for innovations in court research as creative approaches to soliciting court user voice continue to emerge.