Madam Chair, what I would say in response to concerns about shifting to, primarily, digital forms of dispute resolution would be that it's integral to the committee to adopt a systemic lens in terms of how it vets different digital options. What I mean by that is that I'm thrilled to hear Mr. Garrison reference concerns about systemic disparities, about the ways in which different procedural paradigms can have a disparate impact on different groups. I think that's true.
To be frank, I haven't been running trials during COVID, digital or otherwise, so in that sense, I would defer to the Criminal Lawyers' Association in terms of their perspective on the consequences of this for disparate groups.
I could see circumstances where it's very important and other circumstances where it has negative consequences, so I think the contribution I can make to this conversation is to say that it is foundational to be thinking not only about procedure, what works and what seems fair in an abstract sense, but also about the material consequences.
An earlier individual during this meeting spoke about how one of the benefits of logistical complexities with certain hearings is that it pressures people toward settlement. I would say that a systemic lens would raise concerns about that. If there is pressure toward settlement because of financial limitations, that's a systemically racist policy, full stop.
That systemic lens is very important, but in terms of specific procedural ideas, I would defer to the other witnesses who would have more personal experience with that.