Public Property

When I reflect on the dialogs today, other thoughts and themes, which are really variations on some that others have discussed, unfold. One thing that strikes me is that the buildings in Berkeley and Jefferson County that have been built as courthouses since the 1800’s have been converted buildings. In order to make room for Magistrates when the Supreme Court said that they could no longer work out of their houses, they converted the John Street School. John Small attended there and he was one of the people who designed the modifications. Later a bowling alley and a bank became courtrooms, near the “old courthouse.” Most recently, in Jefferson County, the old jail was converted. The new judicial center started out as a woolen mill/factory and was then an outlet mall? Does the former use say anything about the location? The structure? The memories? The way the buildings function?
Another thing that strikes me is the growing lack of public access to the courts. That was not a theme I went in aware of, but it emerged so clearly and is perhaps the crisis in judicial architecture. How can we create spaces where the public feels both welcome and safe to use to address their conflicts? After a recent crisis in Yolo County, California where the public was locked out of an open proceeding, one legislator proposed rules to provide public access to courts. Her legislation provides, in part: “Each court security plan must address how the presiding judge and sheriff will ensure that security services are provided in a manner that protects the Sixth Amendment right of criminal defendants to a public trial and the right of public access to court proceedings under the First Amendment and Section 124 of the Code of Civil Procedure…(the plan must) describe policies and procedures for ensuring that security services are provided in a manner that protects the Sixth Amendment right of criminal defendants to a public trial and the right of public access to court proceedings under the First Amendment and Section 124 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Describe the training to be provided to ensure that courtrooms remain open to the public unless a lawful court order authorizes closure. Describe outreach efforts to local media and any Bench-Bar-Media Committee to facilitate discussion of concerns about fair trials, the free press, and other key issues affecting the courts, the media, and the public."http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2008/07/state_senate_ma.html

This story and the access issue that our community members who care about justice have raised sent me searching through some old legal opinions. There is a quote from U.S. Supreme Court decision that may perfectly describe the issue of the public nature of the courthouse. “What transpires in the court room is public property." Craig v. Harney, 331 U.S. 367, 374 (1947).
This rather overriding issue about access to courts and the important part that the courthouse plays in community, does not overshadow the others. It may be the most concrete. (Pardon the pun.) But probably one of the most important messages I’m hearing is that the issues are not the courtrooms, it’s the courthouse. That shouldn’t be a surprise. As a lawyer, I know that most cases settle and never see the inside of a courtroom. However, the place, the experience of knowing that this building is “public property” is important. The courthouse doesn’t just house an isolated chamber someplace where bad things happen. It is a place where the community meets to resolve their conflicts. It is a place where relationships are created and mended. In short, the relationship between justice and architecture is this: the architecture must be mindful of creating a space where the citizens and judiciary of the community are respected, where they may be challenged to be a member of that community, and where they have room to talk openly and freely, with full participation of one another.