WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SB 2966

AN ACT RELATING TO COURTS AND CIVIL PROCEDURE -- COURTS -- PERMITTING VIRTUAL OR REMOTE COURT HEARINGS

2026 Regular Session Introduced by Jonathon Acosta and 7 co-sponsors

Remote court appearances are allowed across Rhode Island courts with equal legal effect and a right to participate remotely, unless a judge stipulates in-person due to fairness con

05/05/2026 Committee recommended measure be held for further study
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SB 2966

Summary of Bill: SB 2966 (Rhode Island, 2026) — Permitting Virtual or Remote Court Hearings

Purpose and Intent

  • Establishes a framework for conducting court hearings and related proceedings remotely or virtually across all Rhode Island courts.
  • Aims to increase accessibility and efficiency by allowing remote participation while preserving the equal legal effect of remote appearances.

Key Provisions and Changes

  • Remote/Virtual Proceedings Authorized (8-20-1):
    • In all Rhode Island courts (including Supreme Court, Superior Court, Family Court, District Court, Workers’ Compensation Court, and Traffic Tribunal), hearings, conferences, motions, and other court appearances may be conducted in whole or in part by remote means, as permitted by the court.
  • Right to Remote Participation (8-20-2):
    • Any party involved in a proceeding (plaintiff, defendant, respondent, witness, or attorney of record) must be allowed to participate remotely by telephone or video conference.
    • Courts may adopt reasonable rules and procedures to ensure orderly administration of justice.
  • Judicial Discretion to Require In-Person Appearance (8-20-3):
    • Courts may order an in-person appearance if there is a specific on-record finding that a remote appearance would materially prejudice a party’s rights, impair the integrity of the proceeding, or otherwise hinder fair/efficient administration of justice.
  • Equal Legal Effect (8-20-4):
    • Remote appearances have the same legal effect as in-person appearances.
    • No party may be disadvantaged or prejudiced solely due to remote participation.
  • Rules and Procedures (8-20-5):
    • Chief justices/presiding authorities may issue rules, administrative orders, or procedures governing remote/virtual appearances.
    • This includes standards for technology, notice, identity verification, and official record creation.
  • Accessibility (8-20-6):
    • Courts must strive to make remote participation reasonably accessible to self-represented litigants and individuals with disabilities, aligned with applicable state and federal law.
  • Effective Date:
    • The act takes effect upon passage.

Affected Parties and Institutions

  • Jurisdiction: All Rhode Island courts mentioned in the act (including the Supreme Court, Superior Court, Family Court, District Court, Workers’ Compensation Court, and Traffic Tribunal).
  • Participants: Plaintiffs, defendants, respondents, witnesses, attorneys of record, self-represented litigants, and individuals with disabilities.
  • Court Administrations: Requires courts to implement rules and procedures for remote appearances, including technology standards and identity verification.

Procedural and Timeline Considerations

  • Effective Date: Immediate upon passage.
  • Rulemaking: Local courts must establish or adopt rules and procedures to govern remote/virtual appearances (technology standards, notice, identity verification, official record creation).
  • On-the-record Findings: Allows for in-person requirements only if a court finds, on the record, that remote participation would prejudice rights, impair integrity, or impede fair/efficient administration of justice.
  • Accessibility Focus: Emphasizes accommodation for self-represented litigants and those with disabilities.

Practical Implications

  • Potentially broadened access to court participation for individuals with transportation, scheduling, or disability barriers.
  • May reduce courtroom crowding and streamline scheduling, while preserving each party’s rights when remote participation might threaten fairness.
  • Requires investment in or reliance on reliable remote-communication technologies and robust identity/record-keeping practices.

If you’d like, I can provide a side-by-side comparison with current Rhode Island practice or draft a one-page briefing for stakeholders (courts, attorneys, and the public).

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.