HideLast Call: Our Black Friday weekend sale ends tonight! Shop now to save on all Techdirt gear »
HideLast Call: Our Black Friday weekend sale ends tonight! Shop now to save on all Techdirt gear »

New Bill Calls For An End To PACER Fees, Complete Overhaul Of The Outdated System

from the pass-this-pls dept

The perennial make-PACER-free legislation has arrived. If you're not familiar with PACER, count yourself among the lucky ones. PACER performs an essential task: it provides electronic access to federal court dockets and documents. That's all it does and it barely does it.

PACER charges taxpayers (who've already paid taxes to fund the federal court system) $0.10/page for EVERYTHING. Dockets? $0.10/page. (And that "page" is very loosely defined.) Every document is $0.10/page, as though the court system was running a copier and chewing up expensive toner. So is every search result page, even those that fail to find any responsive results. The user interface would barely have been considered "friendly" 30 years ago, never mind in the year of our lord two thousand twenty. Paying $0.10/page for everything while attempting to navigate an counterintuitive interface draped over something that looks like it's being hosted by Angelfire is no one's idea of a nostalgic good time.

Legislation attempting to make PACER access free was initiated in 2018. And again in 2019. We're still paying for access, thanks to the inability of legislators to get these passed. Maybe this is the year it happens, what with a bunch of courtroom precedent being built up suggesting some illegal use of PACER fees by the US Courts system. We'll see. Here's what's on tap for this year's legislative session:

Representatives Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) and Doug Collins (R-Ga.) are hoping to drastically change all of the above with their bipartisan reform effort, the Open Courts Act (OCA).

The bill would make online access to federal court records free to the public. It also contains language that would effectively improve upon PACER’s current and wildly out-of-date search functionality, increase third-party accessibility to the entire system, and upgrade and maintain the database using modern data standards.

This is a good bill. It aims for something more than just free access. (To be honest, that would at least offset the frustration of subjecting yourself to PACER's hideous charms in an attempt to talk it out of some filings.) Free access is a necessity. At this point, the presumed openness of the court still hides behind a paywall, separating citizens from courtroom documents under the naive theory that it's impossible to give something away if it costs money to produce. (And that assumption ignores the tax dollars already earmarked for running the court system.)

This bill would also drag the PACER system (presumably kicking and screaming) into the future… or at least a much more recent past. The 1995-esque front end would be updated, along with all the other stuff that doesn't work well… which is pretty much everything.

It would be a bit more future-proofed. The bill [PDF] demands transparent coding that will incorporate "non-proprietary, full text searchable, platform-independent" elements. This means documents will finally be searchable by the text they contain, rather than limited to locating documents by finding the right docket and going from there. And this will hopefully fix another problem with PACER: search issues baked into the system by jurisdiction divisions. Each federal court has its own login page and, while it's possible to search all jurisdictions, it's far more likely you'll be dimed to death by useless searches before you find what you need.

But who's going to pay for this, I hear the US Courts system asking? Well, like any other FTP service, it will be mostly supported by whales.

On its own terms, the OCA would take two to three years to modernize the overall CM/ECF so that all court documents are searchable, readily accessible and machine-readable regardless of an end user’s browser setup. During this period, so-called institutional “power users” would still be subject to PACER fees–if they charge over $25,000 annually.

But not forever.

After that, fees would vanish entirely.

Will this be the bill that sticks? Maybe. Courts are finding the PACER system questionable -- not just the barrier it places between the public and court documents, but the uses of the fees as well, very little of which has actually been spent on improving PACER itself. If there's something almost everyone agrees with, it's that PACER sucks. Being asked to pay for the dubious privilege of using a barely working system is the insult piled on top of the $0.10/page injury.

Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: court records, doug collins, hank johnson, pacer, transparency


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 17 Sep 2020 @ 12:29pm

    What’s this UWU

    A bill that doesn’t suck? A bill that doesn’t gut a system and make it worse? A bill that potentially fixes a legitimate problem? An update to a system that has long been questioned as extremely outdated and anti-consumer? Is this a bill from an alternative universe where the government actually cares about people?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 17 Sep 2020 @ 12:56pm

      Re: What’s this UWU

      Previous bills have not passed for all the reasons you mentioned.
      You just forgot one other reason... a bill that some private company cannot monetize at taxpayers expense.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    ECA (profile), 17 Sep 2020 @ 1:01pm

    Hate to mention this.

    But,
    When in any ones Lifetime has the USA gov. paid a fair price for anything?
    It used to be they took BIDS by companies. and compared them and then the lowest bidder(?), it was rumored, got the contracts.
    And anything we see Now tends to be the Highest bidder, or to Specific companies ONLY. And some of the gov sites created in recent past, have been Total Garbage. Some of the Main gov. sites have had Data removed, and it isnt easy to find anymore. such as the Water testing info, for every city in the USA.

    Its been interesting that the Company the gov. has, doing the internet sites, has been in the news a few times over the years, as the sites created Failed, Fell apart, got hacked, and COST a fortune to have made.
    I dont know why our gov. doesnt use the corps that are out there, that have Shown they Can DO very well, and have done very well in the past, creating sites. Google, amazon, and a few others. Or at least take Bids, have a few show samples, and Have REAL work for the people and companies Specific to what they want.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      ECA (profile), 17 Sep 2020 @ 1:07pm

      Re: Hate to mention this.

      AND,
      Iv always had the question about HOw to get copies of the laws.
      How to find the regulations? Iv had others do this for imports into the USA and they struggled, as the regs they found didnt tell them anything, and there was another section that not published and EASY to find/read/understand, that shows What is Tariff'd and how much.

      With a virtual world, and virtual Documents, we only need to do things ONCE, in the best way. And the access would be simple and easy. Unless you Love Lawyers that already have the info, that WE cant find.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Nick. L. N. Dime, 17 Sep 2020 @ 2:34pm

    But not forever.

    "On its own terms, the OCA would take two to three years to modernize....."

    "After that, fees would vanish entirely."

    Not so, Tim. Like a certain virus, the fees will magically disappear, just days before a major election.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    :Lobo Santo (profile), 17 Sep 2020 @ 5:22pm

    Business Opportunity!!

    (insert money sound here).

    I wonder, if somebody were to pick a given court, pay the fee to download every docket/page, and then offer them up on a website with good search and a reasonable monthly fee, could they turn a profit on the endeavor?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    teoremerzc (profile), 22 Sep 2020 @ 3:16am

    Review

    Its been interesting that the Company the gov. has, doing the internet sites, has been in the news a few times over the years, as the sites created Failed, Fell apart, got hacked, and COST a fortune to have made. https://www.mypascoconnect.me/
    I dont know why our gov. doesnt use the corps that are out there, that have Shown they Can DO very well, and have done very well in the past, creating sites. Google, amazon, and a few others. Or at least take Bids, have a few show samples, and Have REAL work for the people and companies Specific to what they want.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Close

Add A Reply

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Insider Shop - Show Your Support!

Essential Reading
Techdirt Insider Chat
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.