By Michael Phillips

In a year marked by heightened public scrutiny of America’s family courts, Pennsylvania has emerged as a battleground for change. At the center of the movement is State Representative Jamie Flick (R-Lycoming/Union), who has introduced two high-impact bills that aim to transform the way child custody is decided and how the public can access courtroom proceedings. His proposals—House Bill 378 and House Bill 1397—represent some of the boldest steps toward transparency and fairness in the Pennsylvania court system in years.

House Bill 378: Streamlining Child Custody Decisions

Passed by the Pennsylvania House on May 8, 2025, by a near-unanimous vote of 202–1, House Bill 378 proposes to simplify child custody determinations by reducing the number of factors courts must consider from 16 to 12. These factors, previously criticized for being overly broad and inconsistently applied, are now required to be disclosed in writing to all parties in a custody petition. This move toward transparency could help level the playing field for self-represented parents.

Flick also introduced an amendment to presume 50-50 shared custody between fit parents, a reform long advocated by equal parenting advocates. Though the amendment failed narrowly—99 in favor, 103 opposed—it sent a clear signal that bipartisan momentum for shared parenting is growing in the Commonwealth.

“As someone who has personally experienced the frustrations of family court, I believe our system needs to put children first, not bureaucracy,” Flick said on the House floor. His bill is now in the hands of the Pennsylvania Senate, where advocates hope it will advance with similar bipartisan support.

House Bill 1397: Cameras in the Courtroom

Just five days later, on May 13, 2025, Flick reintroduced another piece of legislation: House Bill 1397, which would permit audio and video recording of Pennsylvania courtroom proceedings—criminal and civil alike—with narrow exceptions. The bill excludes recordings of child witnesses and victims of sexual assault or domestic violence, striking a balance between transparency and privacy.

The initiative comes amid rising public demand for visibility into a court system that many say operates behind closed doors. Flick cited the infamous “Kids for Cash” scandal—a judicial corruption case where two Pennsylvania judges received kickbacks for sending children to for-profit detention centers—as a stark example of what courtroom secrecy can conceal.

A survey conducted by Flick’s office revealed overwhelming constituent support for courtroom transparency: 96% of respondents favored allowing cameras in court.

“This is about accountability,” Flick said. “The public deserves to see how justice is administered, especially in cases that affect families and fundamental rights.”

House Bill 1397 is currently awaiting review in the House Judiciary Committee.

What’s Next?

Together, these two bills reflect growing concern about fairness, secrecy, and unequal treatment in Pennsylvania courts—especially in family law. Whether either bill reaches the governor’s desk remains to be seen, but Rep. Jamie Flick has clearly tapped into a rising bipartisan appetite for court reform.

As debates continue, one thing is clear: parents, advocates, and voters are watching closely—and in Flick’s case, perhaps soon with cameras.