New Rules Coming On Web Access To Court Files.(Government
Activity)
Author/s: Brian Krebs
The policymaking body for the federal courts is expected to release
as early as Wednesday recommendations that could restrict the level of
public access to court files online.
Due to the "enormous level of public interest" in the
matter, the recommendations will be released nearly a month in advance
of the Judicial Conference's Sept. 11 meeting, according to Dick
Carelli, spokesman for the Administrative Office of the Courts.
A diverse range of groups - including the Justice Department,
journalists, law libraries, bankruptcy attorneys and civil liberties
groups - have filed briefs with the judicial body concerning the
government's plan to link files from all federal courts under a single
Web-based system, known as PACER (Public Access To Court Electronic
Records).
The recommendations will be issued by the Subcommittee on Privacy and
Electronic Access to Case Files, a panel of eight judges created last
year by the Judicial Conference of the United States to examine the
privacy and security issues raised by the proposed system.
While many federal appeals, district and bankruptcy courts already
place case documents online using the PACER system, users searching for
a particular case must log on to the PACER site for the court in which
those documents were filed.
By 2005, the Administrative Office of the Courts will have completed
work on a new PACER system, which will allow users to search virtually
all court documents from a single site for a nominal fee. So far, only a
handful of the 200 U.S. federal, district and appellate courts have
converted to an all-digital court document database that is open to the
public.
Consumer groups worry that the new system could raise substantial
privacy and fraud concerns, due in part to the number of court files
that contain medical, financial and personnel data.
The planned system enjoys widespread support, however, from
journalists, investigators, marketers, victims rights groups and
database companies, many of whom note that the data in question already
is available to anyone who requests it. The updated PACER system simply
eliminates the hassle of having to visit the court where the records are
stored, the groups have argued.
At a public hearing on the matter in March, the subcommittee said it
would consider three different action plans, ranging from doing nothing
to treating different types of cases - criminal, bankruptcy, civil -
with their own set rules. The third option would allow for the removal
of more sensitive data - such as Social Security numbers and bank
account information - while preserving public access to the entire
physical record at the local courthouse.
Lauren Gelman, a staff attorney who testified before the panel on
behalf of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said the judiciary did not
adequately consider another option: treating court records on a
case-by-case basis.
"What we said was this is one of those tough issues where you
have to balance privacy and First Amendment concerns," Gelman said.
"There is a strong First Amendment interest in oversight of the
courts that is helped by having these documents available online. At the
same time, you have individuals who avail themselves of the court, and
those who are brought before the court, and their expectations of
privacy are very different in each case."
