News Post

By Chief Justice Sarah Stewart

This January, I was sworn in as Chief Justice for the state of Alabama. Under Alabama’s Constitution, the Chief Justice is the administrative head of the trial court system, known as the Unified Judicial System (UJS). The Chief Justice essentially acts as the CEO of the Administrative Office of Courts (AOC), responsible for staffing AOC and overseeing education, training, hiring, retention, IT, budgeting, supplies, payroll, purchasing, and all trial court support such as family, criminal, trial court, and legal services. The Chief’s administrative role with AOC takes up about 70 percent of the time versus the work as an associate justice on the Supreme Court.

With this responsibility in mind, in the months leading up to January, I went on a “listening tour,” personally visiting thirty-seven of our forty-one circuits. I talked with the district court judges, circuit court judges, and circuit clerks about how they viewed our purpose as the judicial branch, what we do well, and what we need to improve. Walking into the office as Chief Justice on that Tuesday in January, we were as prepared as I knew how to be to tackle the challenges we had identified.

Our Purpose and the Mission of AOC

What is the purpose of the judicial branch? Simply put, the purpose of every justice, judge, clerk, and UJS employee is to deliver justice to the people we serve. Our mission at AOC is to do that with integrity, efficiency, and respect. I appointed the best leader I know for the director of AOC, Nathan Wilson. Mr. Wilson possesses the requisite institutional knowledge, a calm temperament, and an incredible work ethic, and strongly believes in our purpose and mission. He is an attorney with extensive experience in the Alabama Court System. He most recently served as the Clerk of the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals.

Together, we created two new divisions at AOC: the Criminal Services Division and a Trial Court Services Division. We appointed Bennet Wright as the Director of the Criminal Services Division and Chris Colee as the Director of the Trial Court Services Division. In addition, we welcomed Stephanie Hamil as the new AOC Finance Director and Erin Dunagan as the AOC Legal Director. They joined seasoned directors Mandi Hall (Family Court), Kiesha Thomas (IT), Vonda Sanders (HR), and Wally Lowery (Judicial College). We have all worked hard these past months to build team camaraderie and a culture of service for the judges and clerks in the field.

Mr. Wilson has fully embraced the day-to-day duties as director of AOC. He and his leadership team have instituted twice-a-month directors meetings; rebuilt the budget from the ground up so that it is transparent and we are accountable for our use of state funds; instilled sound accounting policies and practices; tightened up cybersecurity protocols; worked on building a new UJIS case management system to replace the aging SJIS case management system; increased connectivity to our rural courthouses; created a human resources application and begun the transition to paperless personnel records; updated legal forms; implemented a call log system to emphasize prompt responses to the field on legal issues; provided boots-on-the-ground support for the judges and clerks in response to various crises; and worked with the judges’ and clerks’ associations to create a best-practices educational curriculum. They have a huge number of other projects we identified that we still need to complete to meet our mission and fulfill our purpose.

Mr. Wilson’s gifted leadership has allowed me to focus on some initiatives aimed at addressing systemic needs we identified during my listening tour. Although there are several of them, I want to address the following two.

“A Line of Broken Children”

One of the issues that became readily apparent during my third circuit visit was the abysmally poor condition of juvenile justice throughout the state. Alabama has long struggled with its juvenile justice system. Historically, the trial courts have had to grapple with well-intentioned but misguided legislation, disinterested leadership, disassociated executive branch stakeholders, and strained funding. As a result, as one of our juvenile judges described, we have “a line of broken children wrapped around our courthouses, and no way to help them.”

Our challenges are not solely in juvenile dependency or juvenile delinquency. We face daunting challenges with both types of cases, and they are very often intertwined. Juvenile offenders facing criminal justice regularly have abuse and neglect issues as well.

Family and juvenile courts, especially in rural areas of Alabama, face numerous systemic challenges that hinder meaningful juvenile offender and family participation and delay critical processes like reunification and rehabilitation. One of the most pressing issues is the lack of reliable transportation. Without public transit or dependable personal vehicles, many juvenile offenders and families are unable to attend court hearings, supervised visitations, or treatment sessions, each of which is often critical for maintaining or restoring custody or complying with trial court directives.

Equally concerning is the limited access to mental health services. Many rural communities lack qualified mental health and substance abuse providers, and families frequently cannot utilize telehealth services due to inadequate internet connectivity. This lack of access leaves mental health and addiction issues unaddressed, further entrenching young people and their families in crisis.

In addition, the shortage of affordable housing and licensed childcare creates impossible choices for parents, often forcing them to choose between maintaining employment or meeting court-ordered obligations. These overlapping barriers—transportation, healthcare, mental health, housing, and childcare—compound to prevent young people and families from achieving long-term stability or complying with court directives. Ultimately, these systemic gaps create an environment where court-involved young people and families in Alabama are at a significant disadvantage, undermining both rehabilitation efforts in delinquency court and the overall goal of long-term family stability in dependency court.

Juvenile crime is escalating along with reports of abuse and neglect. In my discussions with both executive branch and legislative branch leadership, there is growing recognition that ignoring and marginalizing our young people negatively impacts the long-term well-being of our communities. Courts are uniquely positioned to lead statewide and local efforts to create safer systems and stronger families.

In my view, the judicial branch must do all that we can to keep juveniles from offending the first time, and once that first offense has happened, from behavior escalating into adult criminal activity. We also have a responsibility to help Alabama’s families remain intact in a healthy and fully functioning manner.

For the judicial branch to drive the narrative on comprehensive juvenile justice reform, we put together the Juvenile Leadership Task Force made up of dedicated juvenile court judges. The task force’s self-defined mission is to refine the juvenile justice system to improve outcomes for youth and families to strengthen communities in every county in Alabama. The goal is to develop a vision for what juvenile justice should look like, from the very first interaction a juvenile has with our branch (often chronic absenteeism) to the day we finally close their case. The task force has identified other juvenile court judges interested in developing the vision and key areas to focus on to fully understand the scope.

The intent is that once we have a fully developed vision of how juvenile justice should flow and work, we will engage the executive branch stakeholders, county commissions, law enforcement, private foundations, the faith-based community, and all our community partners. In particular, the leadership of the Department of Mental Health, the Department of Human Resources, the Department of Youth Services, the Boards of Education, the District Attorneys and Sheriffs Associations have all expressed a commitment to work together with us on this critical initiative.

Countering Recidivism

Before January 2025, AOC did not have a division focused on criminal justice in the trial courts. While recognizing the need for trial court support generally, we also wanted the newly created Criminal Services Division to address ways to reduce the criminal population, particularly in our prison system.

Although the judicial branch cannot prevent adults from committing first-time offenses, we can have a significant impact in keeping offenders from committing subsequent offenses by addressing recidivism in our criminal population. Except for the few judges whose jurisdiction is limited solely to civil, domestic, or family court cases, most circuit and district court judges across the state spend about 70 percent of their time on criminal cases. Most judges would tell you that, on criminal docket days, they see the same faces repeatedly.

Roughly 95 percent of offenders in prison will eventually be released, either through parole or upon completion of their imposed sentence. The vast majority of offenders will return home to their communities, where they often fall back into the same group of “friends” engaged in the same criminal behavior that ended with a prison sentence. Historically, roughly 35 percent of offenders released from prison return to prison within three years of being released. Sending offenders to prison seems to do little to curb subsequent repeat criminal behavior.

Which leads to the question of what can be done to divert offenders from the path to prison. Specifically, what can the judicial branch do to impact the prison population and the resulting recidivism rate? Many years of research shows that using evidence-based intervention programs, the courts can address the root causes of criminal behavior and significantly impact the recidivism rate, in particular the twin and intertwined drivers of mental health and substance addiction issues.

Alabama has long had a statewide statute authorizing the creation of drug courts. Throughout the years, however, circuit and district court judges have instituted mental health, veterans, family, and many other courts in response to growing needs in their communities. We refer to these courts collectively as “accountability courts” because our evidence-based models are designed to hold offenders accountable while addressing the root causes driving criminal behavior.

The premise of these evidence-based accountability court models is that the trial judge, along with the prosecutor, defense lawyer and other critical team members, work to implement a treatment and rehabilitation plan designed to address not only the underlying mental health and substance abuse, but also to provide the training and skills needed to hold a job, have reliable transportation, and maintain a stable home.

A successful accountability court graduate leaves the program not only with restored health, stability, and hope but also often with renewed relationships with their children and families. Importantly, the recidivism rate for a successful graduate of Alabama’s accountability courts is between roughly 8 percent and 15 percent. Just as significant, these individuals return to our communities as productive contributors, rather than costing taxpayers approximately $100 per day to remain incarcerated. Our initiative started with asking the legislature to pass a statute expanding the drug court model to encompass all the other grass-roots courts, including mental health, veterans, juvenile and family treatment courts. The legislature was resoundingly supportive, passing the bill unanimously in both houses, and the Governor quickly signed it.

At the AOC, our goal is to expand access to accountability courts so that individuals in every judicial circuit can participate. We are committed to ensuring that each court operates with a foundation of evidence-based minimum standards, providing confidence that the programs are achieving their intended outcomes. We also want to provide a blueprint for the ultimate best-practices court that every accountability court program could strive towards. Capturing reliable data is also a priority, enabling us to demonstrate the impact these courts have on reducing recidivism. And finally, we want to provide a stable financial base for each of these courts to function fully with the cost of accountability administrators, counselors, drug tests, programs and treatment providers.

To accomplish all of this, we established an Accountability Court Leadership Task Force comprising District Attorneys, Public Defenders, treatment partners, Accountability Court administrators, Community Correction Program directors, trial judges, and AOC leadership. In partnership with AllRise, the national organization for drug court professionals, the Accountability Court Task Force will provide a comprehensive set of policies and procedures. This effort will include minimum standards, a dynamic best practices blueprint informed by the latest research, an operations manual, and a practical “how-to” guide for judges seeking to establish an accountability court in their circuit or county for the first time. The Accountability Court Task Force held its first monthly meeting and established goals to complete within the year. After the Task Force finishes their work, AOC and experienced trial judges and administrators will educate, train, and implement the accountability court system statewide.

Once we have the accountability court program underway, we will direct our attention to the Court Referral Officer (CRO) and Court Referral Education Programs (CREP), the Community Corrections Programs, and relapse prevention for those offenders who do go to prison and are released. Our thought is to create and support a continuum of increasing consequences for increased behavior, starting with the CRO/CREP programs for low-level offenders; Accountability Courts for the high risk/high need offenders; Community Corrections Programs in lieu of imprisonment; prison when all other attempts to address the underlying issues and curb criminal behavior have failed; and finally relapse prevention for offenders who have been paroled or reached the end of their sentence.

All of our programs will succeed best with the strong relationships we are developing with our executive branch partners such as the Department of Mental Health, the Department of Corrections, the Board of Pardons and Paroles, the District Attorneys and Sheriffs, the county commissions, the Alabama Community College System, ADECA and Workforce Development, among others. While this is a major initiative, the enthusiasm and support we have received from all these stakeholders already are inspiring.

Why This Matters 

We have several other system-wide initiatives that we will address in the coming months, but you may be asking yourself, why does any of this matter? I have been speaking about the answer to this issue for the past few months, and it is the catalyst behind my systemic initiatives.

Getting the law right and understanding justice demands the best from us. Simply put, being a lawyer or a judge the right way is hard. All of us in the legal field have been grappling with immense change over the past few years. The world is still reeling from the aftershocks of the pandemic. Legal systems are adapting to new technologies, while political polarization is testing the bounds of civil discourse. The independence of our judicial system and the rule of law are undoubtedly under great stress.

Our profession doesn’t just interpret the law—our profession shapes the world. The law is not just about rules, precedents, and words. Fundamentally, at its core, the law is about people. Behind every statute, every precedent, every verdict, is a human life—someone seeking justice, someone looking for hope, someone needing to be heard. And now, more than ever, the world needs lawyers and judges who lead not with ego, but with empathy. Lawyers and judges who know that the loudest voice in the room is not always the most just. Who understand that justice is not a given—it is earned, upheld, and fought for. That requires all of us to be lawyers and judges the right way, by working hard, and having courage.

The future of the law will be shaped by many forces—artificial intelligence, globalization, politics, and evolving human rights. The soul of the law, however, will be shaped by lawyers and judges.

Because of this, we must be the advocates for the voiceless, the architects of fairer policies, and the defenders of liberty when it is threatened. We must be the greatest critics of the legal system when it falls short but must also be the drivers and leaders of change and growth. We need to use our legal knowledge not to build walls, but to build bridges. Use our skill not just to win, but to mend. Use our voices not to echo, but to lead.

Throughout the history of organized society, the judicial branches of governments have been charged with upholding the rule of law, applying it equally to the rich and the poor, the powerful and the weak. Some of the best constitutions extolling the people’s rights belong to the worst, most tyrannical countries. The difference is an independent judiciary and the rule of law. To keep the rule of law alive, to keep an independent judiciary, justice demands courage, fairness, and equality.

The judicial branch in America is the weakest by design. We don’t have the power to make laws like the legislature, and we certainly don’t have the power of the purse. We don’t have enforcement power like the executive branch; they have the power of the sword and shield. So, what power does the judicial branch have?

All the power the judicial branch has comes from the trust, the belief, and the confidence of the people. People must believe that the outcomes in the courtroom are achieved fairly, justly, and under the rule of law. Without that belief and trust, justice will fail.

As a judge or lawyer, how we treat the people we represent; the people on the other side of our cases or tables; the people in the courtroom; or the people in all aspects of our lives – how we treat them and what they observe about us will absolutely determine whether they trust in the law and believe in justice.

Everything we work for depends on the people’s trust and belief. We are the critics, the menders, the listeners, and the fighters. Systemic initiatives like these are grounded in our responsibility to grow the confidence, belief, and trust of the people we serve. And that is why it matters.