Courts and government meetings have fallen into chaos after moving hearings to Zoom and getting swarmed with nudity and offensive remarks

• Government functions ranging from city hall meetings to supreme court cases have moved to video conferencing platforms like Zoom amid stay-at-home orders across the US brought on by COVID-19.
• The transition has led to public forums being disrupted by "Zoom bombers," as well as disagreements over proper Zoom etiquette.
• Multiple municipal meetings were cut short after intruders flashed nudity or blasted offensive remarks. One judge reprimanded lawyers for Zooming into court while still in bed or partially clothed.
• The transition has also led to a transparency nightmare — government watchdogs say it's increasingly difficult to scrutinize proceedings that would typically have been open to the public.
• Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

The government is now on Zoom — and so far, it's chaos.

A Michigan city hall meeting was cut short after a man introduced himself as "Dan D---head." A Florida judge reprimanded lawyers for Zooming into court while still in bed. An Indiana Election Commission meeting was interrupted by a man masturbating on camera.

Across the US, government agencies and departments are struggling to adjust to the new normal of videoconferencing as the COVID-19 outbreak forces Americans to stay home and avoid contact. Many government functions are mandated by law to be open to all and allow public comment, leaving agencies to strike a balance between remaining open and preventing trolls.

The transition to videoconferencing has also become a nightmare for public oversight, according to watchdog groups and transparency advocates.

Many court watchers have been left in the dark after difficulty signing on to virtual hearings, according to a report from The Marshall Project last week. Several trials have unfolded in Los Angeles and Miami without outside observers given a link to watch remotely, while New Orleans courts have reportedly given access to video streams based on individual judges' decisions.

And some courts — including those in New York City — have declined to put hearings online, instead forcing would-be observers to go to the courthouse and watch trials on a screen there, potentially risking their health.

"Court watching has a really important use as an accountability mechanism," Court Watch NYC cofounder Rachel Foran, who organizes court watching groups nationwide, told Business Insider. "It's a way for the community to have a say in the criminal legal process and offer a different vision of safety and justice than what the criminal legal system typically allows for."

Now, civil liberties advocates are exploring whether holding public proceedings via videoconference could be considered unconstitutional.

Douglas Keith, counsel at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University, told Business Insider that while video trials have been carried out under some circumstances before COVID-19, the move to virtual courtrooms could raise constitutional questions, especially if it becomes a more common practice in years to come.

Trials held on video conferencing software that aren't made publicly available could impact the outcome if outside observers can't watch.

"One of the major purposes of the public trial is that by having the family members and interested parties in the courtroom, it reminds all of the participants of the justice system of how important their responsibilities are," Keith said. "There are questions about whether a digital hearing can convey the same impact."

Judges nationwide have to decide how to run a virtual court — and they aren't always in agreement.

As the legal justice system adapts to virtual meetings, it's not always clear what norms from the courtroom carry over to Zoom.

A Florida judge scolded lawyers in an advisory last month, stating that many had eschewed courtroom behavior.

"It is remarkable how many ATTORNEYS appear inappropriately on camera," Broward Circuit Judge Dennis Bailey wrote. "We've seen many lawyers in casual shirts and blouses, with no concern for ill-grooming, in bedrooms with the master bed in the background, etc. One male lawyer appeared shirtless and one female attorney appeared still in bed, still under the covers."

How exactly to conduct trials via videoconference falls to judges. According to The Marshall Project, some courtrooms have been publicly broadcast, while others across the country have gone dark — seemingly at the whims of the judges presiding over them.

Struggling to block Zoom-bombers in an open forum

In the wake of a series of Zoom-bombing attacks in which trolls interrupt public meetings, Zoom has urged clients to change their preferences to block outsiders from joining the meeting or from being heard.

But for many city and state government agencies, locking down meetings isn't an option thanks to state laws that mandate certain government meetings be open to public comment.

The town leadership of Grosse Ile, Michigan had to cut a public Zoom meeting short last month during a legally-mandated public comment section, when two meeting participants made racist comments and a third introduced himself as "Dan D---head."

"One person out of line, in a room full of people who won't tolerate it, it just doesn't go over well," township supervisor Brian Loftus told The Detroit News, adding that the same dynamic doesn't apply in a video conference.