New Mexico Courts Boost Accessibility Through Collaboration and Data

A new poll from The Pew Charitable Trusts found that about one-third of adults in the U.S. live in households in which someone has defended or initiated a court case, whether it be civil, criminal, family, or traffic-related. That means that roughly 91 million people have visited their local or state courthouse to resolve matters pertaining to their health, safety, and day-to-day legal matters.

Courtesy of Subject

Among the poll’s respondents, those who reported having a disability were far more likely to have engaged with the court system (49%) than those without disabilities (29%). As outlined by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), judicial leaders have a responsibility to make court procedures and services reasonably accessible to individuals with disabilities.

New Mexico’s statewide ADA Title II coordinator, Peggy Cadwell, shares how she helps shape accessibility plans in judicial districts throughout the state and how data is used to inform those plans. In particular, she talks about the state’s scribing services, which have enhanced access for self-represented litigants who are unable to read or complete forms.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

Q: You’ve been deeply involved in statewide accessibility planning for the courts. What factors have been essential to effective implementation?  

A: When I first started this work, it was overwhelming because there was so much to be done. One of the key pieces to modernizing access is that your courts must be willing to work with you. We’re very lucky in New Mexico because our Supreme Court understands the needs of the people of New Mexico and values these efforts.

And, although we have a statewide plan in place, we make sure that we meet with every judicial district for community-specific adaptations. The court employees in each district understand the unique needs of their community, how their courts operate, and what resources they have available. We want to make sure that we tailor the plans to address the specific needs for that district, so it’s crucial to get them involved every step of the way.

Q: Part of your role includes investigating ADA complaints. What patterns or recurring issues do you see in those complaints, and how have they informed your work?  

A: We gather data from a variety of sources, not just ADA complaints, to identify areas to refine court accessibility. For instance, we’ll look at the number of requests for accommodation for court services and the reasons for those requests. We also track the availability and use of accessibility resources in courts and use that to inform where staff need more training or need to connect with local agencies for support. Gathering this data helps us to have a more effective accommodations process in place.

For example, all courthouses have assistive listening devices available to individuals who are hard of hearing. We found that court staff were handing those out, but because they are sometimes used by interpreters in the courtroom, they were not making the connection that those devices are also an ADA accommodation. We decided to start keeping track of that, because it helps inform our process and how we train our employees to handle those devices.

Q: We know the importance of involving end users to test what’s working and what’s not. What does that process look like for your courts, and what have you learned as it relates to disability access?

A: It’s important to us to gather input from both court users and employees to understand how accommodations and accessibility programs are working out and where we can improve. For instance, as part of a recent self-evaluation of accessibility across our court system, gathering input from the public on what needs to be improved was an important aspect, because what works for me may not work for you.

Another example is our scribing program, which helps some court users with access needs to fill out court forms. We use online surveys, for both court users and employees, to get information about how things are going, what’s working for them, and how we can improve.

Q: Can you tell us more about the scribing program?

A: The scribing program is an accessibility service in which trained court employees assist court users who are unable to fill out court forms—by reading the form aloud, writing down the court user’s responses, and then reading back the responses for accuracy. We piloted the program in 2018 in two judicial districts, and due to its success, the state’s Supreme Court issued an order in 2024 expanding it to all state courts.

The program has been an incredibly positive experience. There was a lot of hesitancy at the beginning in figuring out how we were going to get this done, but what I find overwhelmingly, all the time, is that court employees are thrilled to be able to help with ensuring access to court users.

Q: How is it affecting court users?

Let me tell you about one couple. They tried to adopt for years, but every time they’d come to court, they would be turned away because they didn’t have the correct forms. The scribing program helped them, and they were able to adopt their great-grandchildren. A lot of these processes have a great impact on the way people live their lives, and this access to dignity is such a key part of what we’ve been trying to do. Helping court staff understand the why behind what they’re doing and how it helps the community makes a huge difference.

Q: While New Mexico has earned national recognition for its access efforts, such as the scribing program, some jurisdictions fear that scribing programs might cross into the realm of legal advice. How have you addressed those concerns?

A: When we moved to expand the scribing program across the state, it became very important to incorporate training on the difference between legal advice and legal information. We also created a Request for Scribing Services form for court users to begin the scribing session. It explains the process and sets expectations with court users about what we can and cannot do when it comes to assisting with legal information.

Q: What shifts have you seen around disability access in your state’s court culture?

A: I think courts’ understanding of “access” has evolved in a positive way. It goes back to that educating piece, to not only understanding our legal obligations, but understanding: What is a disability? What does an invisible disability look like? What kind of impact does that have on the court user? What does access look like for somebody who does not understand what you’re saying, or someone who can’t remember what you’re asking them? How long will it take somebody with a disability or someone who needs special transportation to get to a courthouse? Tying these things to the process has been very important.

And it creates benefits all around in terms of what we do every day. If we’re able to provide access, and that person comes to the court and they have a space where they can park or have the documents they need all filled in, ready to go, and they are the correct documents, what does that do for the process? That makes it go smoothly.

Q: What advice would you offer other states about modernizing their disability access infrastructure?

A: Start by looking at the resources and policies already in place and see where you can begin making adjustments. For example, we’re a unified court system, but sometimes jurisdictions have different rules. One courthouse will allow a cellphone, while another one 10 minutes away will not. We know that people use cellphones for accessibility purposes, so that led us to examine these rules to see how we can improve them.

Another way to start is by educating staff on ADA basics. What is a disability, and what does it look like? What are visible and invisible disabilities? How can you make it easier for people to access your services?

It’s also important to help staff understand that when our courthouses—the process, activities, and services—are accessible, it benefits everybody, not just that court user. It really makes the process a lot easier and can help it go a little bit faster.