Last revised (Transmittal 10-022) September 13, 2017

Guide to Judiciary Policy

Vol. 10: Public Access and Records

Ch. 5: Portable Communication Devices in the Courthouse

§ 510 Authority

§ 520 [Reserved]

§ 530 Applicability

§ 540 Admission of Devices into Courthouses

§ 540.10 Devices Covered

§ 540.20 Device Capabilities

§ 540.30 Types of Policies Adopted by Courts on Devices

§ 540.40 Types of Policies Adopted by Courts on Device Use by the Media

§ 540.50 Security Considerations

§ 540.60 Adopting a Court Policy on Devices

§ 510 Authority

(a) This chapter provides guidance on portable communication devices

(devices) in courthouses. The prohibitions on photographing or 

broadcasting court proceedings can be found in Guide, Vol. 10, Ch. 4

(Cameras in the Courtroom). 

(b) In June 2017, the Court Administration and Case Management

Committee, with the concurrences of the Committee on Information 

Technology and the Committee on Judicial Security, updated its 2010

guidance on the admission of portable communication devices into the

courthouse. This chapter sets forth Judicial Conference guidance for 

courts to consider in developing their own policies on the use of portable 

communication devices in courthouses and courtrooms (JCUS-SEP 17, p. 

__). 

§ 520 [Reserved]

§ 530 Applicability

The Committee’s guidance applies to:
Guide to Judiciary Policy, Vol. 10, Ch. 5 Page 2

• all courts of appeals,

• all district courts, 

• all bankruptcy courts,

• the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, and 

• the U.S. Court of International Trade.

§ 540 Admission of Devices into Courthouses

§ 540.10 Devices Covered

Devices include:

• cellular phones;

• “smartphones” (e.g., iPhones, Android devices, and other mobile phones that 

perform many of the functions of a computer);

• tablets;

• laptop computers;

• devices that wirelessly connect to and pair with computers and smartphones 

to transmit data (including smart watches, earpieces, headphones, and 

fitness trackers); and

• audio recorders, still cameras, and video cameras that can connect wirelessly 

to other devices.

§ 540.20 Device Capabilities

(a) Portable communication devices, including cellular and smartphones now 

perform many of the functions of a computer, have internet access, and 

are equipped with cameras and microphones. 

(b) These devices have the ability to live stream video, as well as to post 

videos, pictures, and textual content to the internet, including social media 

feeds (e.g., Twitter, Facebook, Snapchat, Instagram, YouTube, and 

Periscope), and can post content instantaneously to blogs and other 

websites. 

§ 540.30 Types of Policies Adopted by Courts on Devices

Federal courts have adopted a variety of rules to address the admission and use of 

devices in federal courthouses, including the following:

(a) In some districts, possession of devices is strictly limited in the 

courthouse. Districts either prohibit the admission of devices in the 

courthouse or only allow attorneys to bring them into the courthouse with 

stringent restrictions on their use. For example, attorneys may be allowed 

to use their devices only to access a calendar function. 
Guide to Judiciary Policy, Vol. 10, Ch. 5 Page 3

(b) In some districts, devices are generally allowed into the courthouse and 

courtroom, but may have to be turned off or silenced while in the 

courtroom. 

(c) In some districts, individuals with a business reason to enter the 

courthouse (e.g., attorneys, court employees, law enforcement) are 

allowed to possess and use devices in the courthouse and courtroom.

Many districts, however, employ restrictions, which may vary depending 

on the user. Variations include the following: 

(1) Court personnel, law enforcement, building tenants, and attorneys 

are afforded the greatest levels of access in terms of the types of 

devices that can be brought in and the extent to which they are 

allowed to be used in the courthouse and courtroom. 

(2) Jurors typically have more restricted access to devices. 

§ 540.40 Types of Policies Adopted by Courts on Device Use by the Media

(a) Broadcasting of district court proceedings is prohibited under Judicial 

Conference policy (see: Guide, Vol. 10, Ch. 4 (Cameras in the 

Courtroom)), but within that constraint, some courts have adopted policies 

permitting the media to make limited use of devices. In addition, some 

judges have addressed this issue on a case-by-case basis, or when the 

media specifically submits a request to use a device in the courtroom. 

Note: Some judges have allowed the media to use social media, 

including Twitter and other platforms, to provide text-based coverage of 

proceedings from designated locations, such as courtrooms or separate 

rooms with closed-circuit video. None has allowed media to use recording 

functions, including video, audio, or photographs. 

(b) Courts that have policies allowing the media limited use of devices include

some of the following conditions:

(1) Members of the media must register with, and receive approval 

from, the clerk’s office before they can request permission from a

presiding judge to use a device to communicate from the 

courtroom.

(2) Members of the media must make a formal request or otherwise 

receive permission from the presiding judge to use a device to

communicate from the courtroom. 

(3) Members of the media may use devices to communicate from 

within the courtroom unless directed otherwise by the presiding 

judge. 
Guide to Judiciary Policy, Vol. 10, Ch. 5 Page 4

(4) Members of the media must be credentialed to use a device to 

communicate from the courtroom. 

(5) Members of the media may use devices only in designated areas of 

the courthouse. 

(6) Members of the media are only allowed to send and receive text

messages in the courtroom if it does not disrupt proceedings. 

(7) Members of the media may use their devices to take and transmit 

notes to their publisher only from a designated area within the 

courthouse.

(8) Members of the media must not create a verbatim transcript of 

proceedings.

§ 540.50 Security Considerations

(a) Security is an important consideration in dealing with devices, as some 

can be (and have been) converted for use as weapons and explosives, 

which could be operated remotely. Additional concerns have been raised 

due to increased use of non-metallic materials in manufacturing and 

smaller size, which affects the ability of scanning equipment to detect 

devices and hidden explosives. 

(b) Courts should consider providing varying degrees of access to categories 

of persons utilizing the courthouse based on their needs and/or their threat 

potential. For example, some groups, such as court employees, members 

of the bar, and contract employees who have undergone a background 

check, might be allowed greater use of electronic devices in the 

courthouse or courtroom, compared to the general public and jurors. 

(c) The level of restrictions on admission and use of these devices may well 

determine the level of burden placed on the court security officers and 

impact the public’s right of access to the courthouse. Updating and 

augmenting screening equipment, as has been done at airports, will assist 

in reducing these concerns, as will better and more frequent training of 

screening equipment operators.

§ 540.60 Adopting a Court Policy on Devices

(a) Courts should work closely with the district U.S. marshal and the judicial 

security inspector responsible for courthouse security in developing a 

policy regarding devices in the courthouse. Court security committees, 

which may include federal defenders and the panel attorney district 

representative, are well suited to this task and should take the lead in 

policy development.
Guide to Judiciary Policy, Vol. 10, Ch. 5 Page 5

(b) In developing the court’s policy, courts should consider, and seek to 

clearly define, as appropriate:

(1) The devices to which the policy applies, including cellular and 

smartphones, tablets, laptops, and wireless accessories (such as 

smartwatches, fitness trackers, earpieces, etc.) and digital or other 

types of video cameras or audio recorders. 

(2) To whom the policy will apply and how it applies to various types of 

persons entering the courthouse and courtrooms. Some courts 

distinguish among the following groups in their policies, while 

others apply the same policy to all persons:

(A) court personnel, law enforcement personnel, and tenants of 

the building (often given full access for any device);

(B) attorneys, public defenders, assistant U.S. attorneys, CJA 

panel attorneys and their staffs, pro se litigants, and parties 

to the case;

(C) general public;

(D) members of the working media; and

(E) jurors.

(3) The times, locations, or proceedings at which the devices may be 

used (e.g., in the courtroom versus a media room or separate 

courtroom with live feed, during court session versus only during 

recess or before or after proceedings, to record ceremonial events, 

such as naturalizations and swearing in of new judges). 

(4) Whether the same policy should apply in every division and 

courthouse of the district or circuit, or whether different provisions 

should apply to different courthouses. 

(5) Whether the court should provide awareness training or other 

methods to inform persons entering the courthouse of the risks and 

benefits of bringing the device into the courthouse or courtroom that 

support the court’s policy. 

(6) The court administration implications of banning the entry of certain 

devices, including the following:

(A) The impact on the workload of court security officers.
Guide to Judiciary Policy, Vol. 10, Ch. 5 Page 6

(B) The extent of the delay in entry to the building that may 

result.

(C) The need for and feasibility of providing storage facilities in 

the courthouse for these devices and the process for taking 

custody of and returning devices to building entrants and 

dealing with any complaints of damage or liability issues 

relating to the devices that may arise.

(D) If no storage facilities for these devices can be provided, the 

manner of dealing with entrants who cannot store the device 

in their nearby cars or offices because neither of these 

options is available to them.

(c) Whatever policy is adopted, there should be ample notice provided. 

(1) Signs should be conspicuously posted outside the courthouse and 

at the security posts. 

(2) The policy should be featured prominently on the court’s website 

and in notices provided to attorneys and jurors. 

(3) The court security officers should be apprised of both the letter and 

spirit of the policy by the United States Marshals Service judicial 

security inspector, who is the contracting officer’s technical 

representative for the court security officer program and integral to 

implementing this program. The court security officers are contract 

employees, and should only receive their working procedures from 

their supervisors, who receive them from the Judicial Security 

Inspector.