Attacking a Pay Wall That Hides Public Court Filings

WASHINGTON — The federal judiciary has built an imposing pay wall around its court filings, charging a preposterous 10 cents a page for electronic access to what are meant to be public records. A pending lawsuit could help tear that wall down.

The costs of storing and transmitting data have plunged, approaching zero. By one estimate, the actual cost of retrieving court documents, including secure storage, is about one half of one ten-thousandth of a penny per page. But the federal judiciary charges a dime a page to use its service, called Pacer (for Public Access to Court Electronic Records).

The National Veterans Legal Services Program and two other nonprofit groups filed a class action in 2016 seeking to recover what they said were systemic overcharges. “Excessive Pacer fees inhibit public understanding of the courts and thwart equal access to justice, erecting a financial barrier that many ordinary citizens are unable to clear,” they wrote.

The suit accuses the judicial system of using the fees it charges as a kind of slush fund, spending the money to buy flat-screen televisions for jurors, to finance a study of the Mississippi court system and to send notices in bankruptcy proceedings.

A 2002 law allows — but does not require — the judicial system to charge for access to the records, but “only to the extent necessary” to pay for “services rendered.” The judicial system says the law allows it to charge the current fees and to spend the proceeds on a variety of programs. People seeking free access, the judicial system’s brief said, can visit the courthouse.

Last year, Judge Ellen S. Huvelle of the Federal District Court in Washington accepted the challengers’ basic theory and said the judicial system had misused some of the money.

The case is now on appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and the challengers have attracted an impressive array of supporting briefs from retired judges, news organizations, civil rights groups and a sponsor of the 2002 law.

Judge Shira A. Scheindlin, who served on the Federal District Court in Manhattan from 1994 to 2016 and signed a supporting brief, said the issue was straightforward.

“There should be full public access to court records,” she said. “It’s an infinitesimal amount of money when you look at the total budget for the court system.”

The federal judiciary’s budget is about $7 billion. Fees from Pacer generated about $145 million in recent years, or about 2 percent of the total.

Judge Scheindlin said Pacer fees were particularly harmful to litigants who represent themselves, to academic researchers who want to explore systemic issues like sentencing disparities and to journalists at smaller news outlets.

There is one shining exception to the federal judiciary’s hostility to free electronic access to its records. In late 2017, the Supreme Court started its own electronic filing system, making virtually all documents filed with the court available online at no cost.

“The Supreme Court’s system is terrific, and it’s a model for how courts can do this,” said Deepak Gupta, a lawyer for the groups challenging the Pacer fees. “It demonstrates that there isn’t any practical obstacle to making filings available for free.”

Pacer does make some exceptions to its 10-cents-a-page charges. Judicial opinions are free. For other documents, there is a $3 cap. People whose fees are less than $15 in a quarterly billing cycle are charged nothing.

Courts also have some discretion to waive the fees. Curiously, they are generally prohibited from exempting “members of the media.”

That policy is bad for democracy, said a brief filed on behalf of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and 27 news media groups, including The New York Times. “As news outlets across the country face leaner budgets,” the brief said, “few can readily afford daunting fees for court records, especially independent journalists and community news media companies.”

As a practical matter, Pacer has created a two-tier system, lawyers for former Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, who sponsored the 2002 law, wrote in a supporting brief. “Whether an individual is able to access these critical documents will often turn on their financial circumstances,” the brief said. “That is at odds with the principle that all Americans should have equal access to the courts and to the documents that are essential to understanding the operation of our government.”

The pending lawsuit makes a relatively modest argument, saying that the judicial system has charged more than the 2002 law allowed. But there is a larger point here, one grounded in the First Amendment.

“Public scrutiny of judicial proceedings enhances their quality, ensures their fairness and safeguards their integrity,” a supporting brief from the American Civil Liberties Union and other groups said.

The public has a right to know what goes on in its courthouses. Exercising that right should not require paying the government a dime a page or anything at all.

“Federal courts need to be providing this access without charge,” said Stephen W. Smith, who was until recently a federal magistrate judge in Houston and who signed a supporting brief. “There are too many downsides to creating these barriers. If you don’t give effective access to these records, it undermines courts’ legitimacy.”

Source link

more recommended stories

  • Feinstein Lectures Children Who Want Green New Deal, Portraying It as Untenable

    Senator Dianne Feinstein found herself in.

  • On Politics: Trump and Advisers May Have Different Goals for North Korea

    Good Friday morning. Here are some.

  • Mueller Report Expected to Go to Justice Department Within Weeks

    WASHINGTON — The new attorney general,.

  • CNN Is Criticized for Hiring Trump Administration Aide as a Political Editor

    Sarah Isgur Flores, a Republican spokeswoman.

  • On Politics: Inside Trump’s War on the Investigations Encircling Him

    Good Wednesday morning. Here are some.

  • Bernie Sanders on the Issues: Where He Stands and What Could Derail Him

    The measure, drafted by Representative Alexandria.

  • Elizabeth Warren’s Native American Ancestry Draws a Shrug From These Voters

    “She definitely made a mistake,” he.

  • Anthony Weiner Is Out of Prison, and in a Re-Entry Center in Brooklyn

    [What you need to know to.

  • Heather Nauert Withdraws From Consideration as U.N. Ambassador

    PALM BEACH, Fla. — President Trump’s.

  • Watch Out. Tax Season Is Even More Stressful Than Usual.

    Take a deep breath, a drink,.

  • Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Returns to Work at Supreme Court

    WASHINGTON — Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

  • Ilhan Omar Confronts Venezuela Envoy About Iran-Contra Affair and Human Rights – Video

    Channels & Shows Home Search U.S..

  • With Procedural Maneuver, House G.O.P. Elevates Anti-Semitism as Political Issue

    The National Republican Congressional Committee blasted.

  • Unmistakable Divide Among Women in Virginia Over Accusations Against Fairfax

    It is an even more awkward.

  • As Primary Season Begins, Who Can Grab Trump by the Ratings?

    You can tell how deeply Donald.

  • On Politics With Lisa Lerer: The Sexism Shield

    Hi. Welcome to On Politics, your.

  • ‘He May Not Even Be a Free Person,’ Elizabeth Warren Says of Trump in 2020

    CEDAR RAPIDS, Iowa — Countless Democratic.

  • Mission ‘Accomplished’? Trump Boasts of Being Boon for Military

    WASHINGTON — Over the past two.

  • Unlikely Partnership in House Gives Lawmakers Hope for Border Deal

    WASHINGTON — When it became clear.

  • In Surprise Abortion Vote, Roberts Avoids ‘Jolt to the Legal System’

    Mr. Specter, at the time a.

  • On Politics: ‘Green New Deal’ Plan Is Unveiled

    Liberal Democrats hope to redefine the.

  • Albany’s ‘Wonder Twins’ Form a Power Duo, Challenging Cuomo’s Influence

    [What you need to know to.

  • Virginia Attorney General Says He Also Dressed in Blackface

    RICHMOND — Virginia Attorney General Mark.

  • Beto O’Rourke to Make 2020 Decision by End of February

    Beto O’Rourke, the Texas Democrat whose.

  • On Politics: Scandal Splits Top Virginia Democrats

    Good Tuesday morning. Here are some.

  • Trump Won’t Commit to Making Mueller Report Public

    WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — President.

  • ‘I Am Not Either of the People in That Photo’ – Video

    Channels & Shows Home Search Politics.

  • Justice Alito Temporarily Blocks a Louisiana Abortion Law

    WASHINGTON — Saying the Supreme Court.

  • Trump Discusses ‘Fake News,’ and Its Repercussions, With Times’s Publisher

    “And I think I am, too,”.

  • Sanders Unveils Estate Tax Plan, Joining Democrats Who Want to Tax the Rich

    Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, a.

  • Kamala Harris’s Misleading Answer About a Police Shooting Bill

    What Was Said Jake Tapper, CNN.

  • After a Shutdown Test of Wills Comes a Test of Governance

    By the nature of their role.