Judges play a central role in ensuring that individuals in the justice system have access to effective treatment, yet MOUD raises distinct ethical challenges. Courts must promote evidence-based care without directing clinical decisions, endorsing specific medications, or exerting pressure on providers. Presented by Judge Brian MacKenzie (Ret.), this session clarifies the ethical boundaries that apply when courts interact with treatment professionals, address participant concerns, or craft supervision conditions involving MOUD. Participants will learn how to maintain judicial neutrality while still championing practices that improve outcomes and save lives

Objectives:          

 1. Distinguish between appropriate judicial advocacy for evidence-based treatment and actions that cross ethical boundaries or resemble clinical direction. 
 2. Apply ethical principles when communicating with MOUD providers, responding to treatment disputes, and setting supervision conditions. 
 3. Develop courtroom practices that promote transparency, fairness, and participant autonomy while ensuring consistent access to clinically appropriate medication.

Since the emergence of the treatment court model in 1989, a substantial body of research has examined both treatment courts and the populations they serve. This research has identified key factors associated with criminal behavior, recidivism, and effective interventions. Studies consistently demonstrate that treatment courts can reduce recidivism and support meaningful behavior change when research-supported practices are implemented with fidelity.

Presented by Chief Mack Jenkins (Ret.), this session will highlight those evidence-based practices and translate the research into practical, actionable strategies for use in treatment and recovery court settings. Topics will include effective case planning, collaboration with treatment providers, responding to participant behavior, and leveraging community resources to support long-term success. 

Objectives:

 1.  Attendees will learn factors associated with criminal recidivism
 2.  Attendees will learn research supported seven practices of community supervision
 3.  Attendees will learn methods of incorporating Core Correctional Practices into supervision
 4.  Attendees will learn practical steps for implementing best practices while a part of an interdisciplinary team
 5.  Attendees will learn the role of case planning in implementing best practices for supervision.

Traditional sanction and incentive models often fail when applied to individuals with substance use disorders because they do not account for relapse, neurobiology, or the realities of behavioral change. This session equips judges with a framework for designing response grids that align with the science of addiction, reinforce engagement in treatment, and support long-term stability. Presented by Chief Mack Jenkins (Ret.), participants will learn how to calibrate consequences and rewards in ways that drive meaningful behavioral improvement without undermining clinical progress.

Objectives:    

 1. Understand how addiction science, relapse patterns, and motivation theory should shape sanctions and incentives for individuals with SUD.
 2. Design response grids that reinforce treatment engagement, reduce destabilizing penalties, and apply incentives that meaningfully support recovery.
 3. Implement practical courtroom strategies to ensure consistency, fairness, and effectiveness when responding to progress, setbacks, and noncompliance.

Veterans Treatment Courts (VTCs) rely on the invaluable support of volunteer mentors to guide participants through the program and offer a unique peer perspective. However, the mentor role comes with distinct ethical challenges that can impact the success of the court and the well-being of participants. JSI Co-President Judge Brian MacKenzie (Ret.) will examine the key ethical issues mentors face, such as maintaining appropriate boundaries, protecting participant confidentiality, and managing dual relationships. Additionally, it explores the responsibilities of VTC judges in fostering ethical mentor practices and creating clear expectations.

Objectives:

  1.  Conforming mentor conduct to applicable ethical standards in VTC settings;
  2.  Clarifying appropriate professional boundaries between mentors, judges, and other court team members; and,
  3.  Strengthening mentor–participant relationships while maintaining ethical compliance. 

This presentation examines how procedural justice fosters a trauma-informed approach in Treatment Courts. Using core principles—voice, respect, neutrality, and trust—this session offers practical strategies for trauma-sensitive judicial interactions, courtroom procedures, and case management. It will cover communication techniques, trauma-informed sanctions, and ways to enhance participant’s engagement. Additionally, it will highlight how judicial leadership, staff training, and collaboration with various resources can create a supportive court culture that improves outcomes and promotes long-term rehabilitation. During this session, Judge Kevin Burke (Ret.) will address the attendees with the following:   

  1.  Applying procedural justice principles to foster a trauma-informed courtroom environment;
  2.  Implementing effective communication strategies that enhance participant engagement; and,
  3.  Developing a court culture that promotes fairness, accountability, and long-term rehabilitation. 

  1.  Identifying how artificial intelligence currently influences screening, risk and need assessments, clinical evaluations, participant monitoring, sanctions and incentives, and compliance reporting; 

  2.  Applying Frye, Daubert, and Rule 702 standards to AI-generated or AI-assisted evidence used in treatment court proceedings; and, 

  3.  Implementing the “Five Guardrails for Treatment Courts” to promote transparency, fairness, and responsible adoption of AI-enabled technologies. 

Judges sit at the critical intersection of public safety, treatment access, and community health. This session examines how judicial leadership can move a jurisdiction from inconsistent or restricted MOUD practices to a coherent, evidence-based system that saves lives, improves compliance, and reduces recidivism. Presented by Judge Geno Salomone (Ret.), participants will learn how courts can use their convening authority, policy influence, and day-to-day decision-making to dismantle barriers, strengthen partnerships, and ensure that every eligible participant has a clinically appropriate path to treatment.

Objectives:    

 1. Identify structural, legal, and operational barriers that limit MOUD access and outline specific actions judges can take to remove them. 
 2. Strengthen collaboration with treatment providers, probation, jails, and community partners to ensure continuity of care and reduce medication gaps.
 3. Apply leadership strategies that shift court culture toward evidence-based MOUD integration, improving program outcomes and community trust.