Law360 (May 20, 2026, 6:13 PM EDT) -- The Michigan Supreme Court held administrative hearings on Wednesday concerning several proposed amendments to Michigan court rules, including adding more specific guidelines for remote hearings, making language services free for civil cases, and allowing law students and recent law graduates to appear on behalf of indigent people in all Michigan courts.

A proposed amendment to rules for remote court proceedings calls for judicial officers, including judges and referees, to be within 30 miles of the courthouse where the hearing would have been held in person when they hold a remote hearing.

52nd District Court Judge Travis Reeds said that language is arbitrary and limiting and said judicial officers should be allowed to hold remote proceedings from anywhere within the state of Michigan.

"If you are going to set a 30-mile limit, what would be the difference between 10 miles or 60 miles?" Reeds said during the hearing. "We think there are some clear legal precedents that show jurisdiction within the state makes sense, but the 30 miles seems very arbitrary."

Reeds said chief judges should be able to tailor remote guidelines for their building, as every court's needs differ. He said he had concerns that the proposed amendment would limit access for litigants.

"We have found in many cases, remote proceedings allow access to justice more so than in-person proceedings," Reeds said. "There was pushback on remote proceedings from most of us at first, but I think all of us have now seen what an effective tool this can be, not all the time, but when needed."

Oakland County Court referee Daniel Ferency spoke, representing the Referees Association of Michigan. He also opposed the 30-mile radius piece of the amendment, saying that many referees live more than 30 miles from the courthouse where they practice and they would not be able to conduct any hearings remotely if the amendment was incorporated into Michigan court rules.

"Proximity to the courtroom for remote proceedings doesn't equal performance," Ferency said.

Ferency and Third Judicial Court of Michigan Deputy Court Administrator Erin Lincoln agreed the focus should be on accountability, not on limiting access to remote proceedings.

"This seems to apply to a full body cast when only a band-aid is needed," Lincoln said while expressing concern that the 30-mile requirement would cause an exodus of referees, leaving the courts short-staffed.

A proposed amendment that would allow law students and recent law graduates to staff certain legal programs and appear on behalf of indigent persons in all Michigan courts and a related amendment that would streamline the process for pro hac vice admission to practice in Michigan courts were also discussed.

Jacqueline McCann, assistant defender in the State Appellate Defenders Office, said she favors both amendments. She told the court that having interns and law students in the SADO office is "working really well" and added that efforts to balance that with more experienced attorneys would be easier if attorneys who were licensed to practice in other states could work in the same capacity as a law student during the 12 to 14 months it takes to get through the pro hac vice process.

"It is not as easy to get an attorney from another state into the courtroom as it would be if they were still in law school," McCann said. "They should be able to practice the same as a law student for those 12 to 14 months it takes to go through the process."

Law student Taura Brown said that too many people in Michigan, especially low-income residents, cannot access legal representation, and the two proposed amendments would help expand access.

"Many legal aid organizations are overwhelmed and understaffed," Brown said. "The proposal for law students is a reasonable step to expand access to justice."

Free foreign language interpretation services have been available for criminal cases for several years. A proposed amendment to Michigan court rules would expand that free service to civil cases.

Elizabeth Santana, managing attorney at the Michigan Immigrant Rights Center, said allowing free translation services for all types of cases ensures that everyone has equal access to justice and helps those with limited English proficiency who come from lower economic backgrounds.

"One's ability to pay should not prevent them from having justice," Santana said.

--Editing by Vaqas Asghar.

For a reprint of this article, please contact reprints@law360.com.