10 Website Design Improvements Every Court Should Prioritize
Practical lessons from court websites across 10 U.S. states
For Court Administrators, Clerks of Court, Court Executives, and Access-to-Justice Leaders
Introduction: A Court Website Should Serve the Public, Not Reflect the Court’s Organization
For millions of Americans, a court website is their first interaction with the justice system.
Someone seeking protection from domestic violence, responding to an eviction, filing for divorce, or contesting a traffic ticket often begins with a search on their phone.
Unfortunately, many court websites are designed around departments, divisions, statutes, and administrative structures rather than the tasks visitors are trying to accomplish.
The result can be confusing navigation, incorrectly completed forms, unnecessary courthouse visits, and additional workload for clerks and court staff.
The encouraging news is that courts throughout the United States have already implemented useful approaches. From California’s task-oriented homepage to Maryland’s guided interviews and Illinois’s step-by-step filing instructions, there are practical lessons worth borrowing.
Here are ten design improvements, illustrated by examples from ten states.
1. Organize the Homepage Around What Visitors Want to Accomplish
Example: California — Judicial Branch Self-Help Guide
Visit the California Courts Self-Help Guide
California offers one of the clearest examples of task-oriented navigation.
Its Self-Help Guide prominently asks:
“What would you like to do?”
Visitors then choose among options including:
- Get help with papers I was served
- Start a court case
- Work on my court case
- Get information about a legal topic
- Take care of your traffic ticket
- Get help from the court
These choices reflect how members of the public think, rather than requiring them to understand the court system’s internal structure.
What courts should adopt: Put five to eight prominent task-oriented choices on the homepage. Keep departmental navigation available, but secondary.
Operational benefit: Fewer callers asking which department handles their problem, and fewer visitors arriving at the wrong office.
2. Replace Legal Jargon with Plain English
Example: Ohio — Supreme Court Guidance for Self-Represented Litigants
View Ohio’s Domestic Relations Resource Guide
The Supreme Court of Ohio’s guidance explicitly recommends that courts provide information and forms in plain language and understand how self-represented litigants experience court procedures.
This is particularly relevant to website navigation.
| Technical terminology | Public-facing wording |
|---|---|
| Dissolution of Marriage | Divorce |
| Indigency Application | Request a Fee Waiver |
| Pro Se Litigant | Representing Yourself |
| Injunctive Relief | Request a Protection Order |
| Motion to Vacate | Ask the Court to Set Aside a Decision |
These are suggested interface labels, not necessarily substitutes for official legal titles. The precise legal term should remain available on the relevant page.
What courts should adopt: Review the 30 most frequently visited pages and replace unfamiliar navigation labels with public-facing language.
Operational benefit: Fewer misunderstandings and less staff time explaining basic terminology.
3. Give Every Major Case Type Its Own Starting Page
Example: Arizona — Judicial Branch Self-Service Center
Explore Arizona’s Court Forms and Instructions
Arizona’s Self-Service Center organizes information around recognizable legal subjects, including:
- Family Law
- Landlord/Tenant Disputes & Eviction
- Protective Orders
- Name Change
- Small Claims
- Probate
- Fee Waiver & Deferral
This provides a recognizable starting point for people who may not understand court jurisdiction or procedural rules.
A dedicated page should go further by answering what documents are required, what the process costs, whether a user can file electronically, and what happens afterward.
What courts should adopt: Create a consistent page template for every high-volume case type: eligibility, required information, forms, fees, filing method, and next steps.
Operational benefit: Better-prepared litigants and fewer incomplete or misdirected submissions.
4. Offer Guided Interviews Instead of Only PDF Forms
Example: Maryland — Maryland Guide & File
Maryland’s courts offer a guided form-preparation system that asks users a series of questions and automatically uses their answers to complete court forms.
Rather than requiring visitors to identify every applicable form themselves, the interview provides explanations, definitions, and instructions. Users can also save progress and return later.
Where supported, completed forms can be filed electronically.
What courts should adopt: For common self-represented case types, offer an obvious “Start” action that opens a guided interview, with downloadable forms remaining available as an alternative.
A typical experience could follow:
Choose case type → Answer questions → Review documents → File or obtain filing instructions
Operational benefit: Potentially fewer form-completion errors and fewer clerk interactions involving basic paperwork.
5. Make the Entire Process Work on a Smartphone
Example: New York — Unified Court System DIY Forms
Explore New York Courts DIY Forms
New York provides online Do-It-Yourself programs for matters including divorce, support, name changes, and housing cases.
The programs demonstrate the value of asking ordinary questions rather than expecting litigants to fill out complicated forms unaided.
However, the court currently explains that these DIY-generated papers must be printed and filed with the court, rather than electronically filed directly through the programs.
That distinction reveals an important design principle: online form preparation does not necessarily mean an end-to-end digital experience.
What courts should adopt: Test whether someone can complete the entire supported process using only a smartphone, without requiring a printer, desktop computer, or unnecessary travel.
Operational benefit: Greater remote access and less dependence on courthouse equipment and staff.
6. Make Forms Searchable by Topic and Form Number
Example: Colorado — Judicial Branch Self-Help Forms
Explore Colorado’s Self-Help Forms
Colorado’s court forms interface includes a search facility for keywords and form numbers, and its form directory contains English and Spanish versions of various documents.
This approach serves two distinct audiences: attorneys or experienced litigants who know a form number, and members of the public who search by a legal problem.
An effective search should also recognize ordinary phrases and common synonyms.
For example, a search for “change my child’s name” should identify the appropriate name-change resources without requiring the user to know the legal form title.
What courts should adopt: Provide one prominent search tool that accepts form numbers, legal topics, and plain-English questions.
Operational benefit: Fewer requests to staff for form identification and faster access to court resources.
7. Integrate Language Access into the Actual Workflow
Example: Washington — Washington Courts Protection Order Forms
Explore Washington’s Protection Order Forms
Washington’s court forms resources include protection order materials and instructions, with translated resources available for certain forms.
This is particularly important for protection orders, where a person may face urgent circumstances and misunderstandings can have significant consequences.
Providing translated documents is a useful foundation, but an effective multilingual experience should also consider navigation, explanatory instructions, error messages, and follow-up information.
What courts should adopt: Make language selection prominent and preserve the selected language throughout the supported process. Explain how to obtain an interpreter and clearly identify untranslated materials.
Accessibility must also cover keyboard navigation, screen readers, readable contrast, and accessible forms.
The DOJ’s ADA Title II web accessibility rule generally uses WCAG 2.1 Level AA, with compliance dates extended in April 2026 to April 26, 2027, or April 26, 2028, depending on the public entity.
Operational benefit: Improved access for court users who otherwise need additional assistance understanding forms or instructions.
8. Explain the Process as a Sequence of Simple Steps
Example: Illinois — Information for Filers Without Lawyers
Explore Illinois’s Three-Step E-Filing Guide
Illinois provides an especially practical example of process-oriented content.
Its website divides electronic filing into three steps:
STEP 1 — Prepare your documents
STEP 2 — E-file your documents online
STEP 3 — Check whether the clerk accepted them and complete follow-up steps
The third step is particularly valuable. A user may assume that clicking “Submit” means their documents have been officially filed. Illinois explains the need to check acceptance status and address any rejection.
What courts should adopt: Provide a consistent process timeline for each case type, distinguishing submission, acceptance, service, and hearing requirements.
Operational benefit: Fewer status inquiries and fewer missed post-filing responsibilities.
9. Put Safety Warnings and Essential Information Where Visitors Need Them
Example: Texas — Texas Court Help Protective Order Resources
Explore Texas Court Help’s Protective Order Page
Texas Court Help’s protective-order page gives visitors a way to access protective-order information and includes a particularly important feature: “Hide My Screen.”
The site also warns that browsing history may remain visible on a shared device.
This illustrates a broader principle of context-sensitive design. Someone seeking a protection order has different immediate needs from someone paying a traffic ticket.
Safety warnings should appear where relevant without overwhelming every visitor.
Likewise, practical information such as fees, deadlines, courtroom locations, remote hearing instructions, and accommodation requests should appear at the point of need.
What courts should adopt: Identify the most consequential information for each case type and place it prominently in the relevant workflow.
Operational benefit: Fewer avoidable mistakes and safer, more informed use of court services.
10. Make Human Assistance Easy to Find
Example: Florida — Florida Courts Help and Miami-Dade Courts
Explore Miami-Dade Courts’ SANDI Initiative
Florida provides examples of combining online information with pathways to additional assistance.
The statewide Florida Courts Help resources direct visitors to family law forms, local self-help programs, legal aid, and other resources.
Miami-Dade’s Eleventh Judicial Circuit also introduced SANDI, a digital navigation assistant that was designed to help visitors find court information, including self-help resources and courtroom details, with a path to staff assistance.
Digital assistance should be designed to help people find information without confusing it with legal advice or judicial decision-making.
What courts should adopt: Make it obvious how to reach the correct office, self-help center, legal aid resource, or other permitted assistance when online information is insufficient.
Operational benefit: Better routing of inquiries, fewer unnecessary transfers, and more efficient use of clerk and self-help staff time.
What Court Leaders Should Measure
The objective is not merely to increase website traffic. It is to help more people complete their tasks successfully with less avoidable staff intervention.
| Performance measure | Desired improvement |
|---|---|
| Task completion rate | More people complete common tasks without assistance |
| Form deficiencies | Fewer avoidable missing or incorrect submissions |
| Digital adoption | More eligible court users complete tasks online |
| Staff assistance time | Fewer calls and visits for routine procedural questions |
| User satisfaction | More visitors understand what to do next |
Courts can begin by identifying their five highest-volume public transactions and testing each one with people unfamiliar with court procedures.
Ask participants to use only their smartphones. Observe where they hesitate, encounter unfamiliar words, select the wrong form, or fail to understand the next step.
The results can guide a practical redesign without requiring the replacement of the entire website.
Conclusion: An Effective Website Is a Digital Extension of the Clerk’s Counter
The ten states examined here demonstrate that improvements do not have to begin with a complete technology overhaul.
California illustrates task-based navigation. Ohio emphasizes plain language. Maryland demonstrates guided interviews. Illinois provides a clear filing sequence. Texas incorporates safety-conscious design.
Other examples demonstrate opportunities that remain: mobile completion, better forms discovery, multilingual experiences, and stronger connections between digital and human assistance.
The best court website is not necessarily the one with the most features. It is the one that makes the next correct action obvious.
For court administrators and clerks, that offers an important opportunity: improve public access while reducing the number of avoidable interactions that consume limited staff resources.