Legislative and Judicial Developments Affecting Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER)

"Updated February 1, 2022

The Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER) system is the U.S. Court’s web-based service that gives registered users electronic access to documents filed in the U.S. Courts via the online Case Management/Electronic Case Files system, known as CM/ECF. The Administrative Office of the UnitedStates Courts (the “AO”), the federal judicial entity responsible for maintaining PACER, currently charges users ten cents per PACER search as well as 10 cents per page accessed using the system (with a ceiling of $3 per document). The judiciary waives fees on accounts incurring $30 or less in any given quarter. With most users not exceeding this $30 threshold, 25% of PACER users reportedly pay fees in a given quarter. Individuals or groups may prospectively petition for a fee exemption to conduct their PACER searches for specified research projects. This Legal Sidebar discusses recent legislative proposals and litigation that may affect the cost of public access to PACER.

Legislative Efforts to Increase Access to PACER

On December 9, 2021, the Senate Judiciary Committee favorably ordered reported the Open Courts Act of 2021, S. 2614. At the markup session, the committee ordered to be reported, by voice vote, the bill with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. It is one of two legislative proposals introduced this Congress to eliminate the U.S. Courts’ current user fee structure for searching and accessing federal court filings on PACER. While S. 2614, as amended in committee, would make PACER free for the general public, each federal agency would be charged an annual fee equal to the total PACER fees paid by the agency in 2021 (adjusted for inflation).

In addition to removing PACER user fees for the general public, both the Senate Judiciary Committee and House-introduced versions of the Open Courts Act of 2021 (S. 2614 and H.R. 5844) require the AO to modernize PACER’s technical functionality, including the additions of full-text search capabilities and “widely accepted common data elements.” Meanwhile, the AO has been independently weighing recommendations of 18F—the U.S. government technology and design consultant group—to improve functionalities of the public-facing PACER and underlying CM/ECF systems.

A number of legislative proposals similar to the Open Courts Act of 2021 have been introduced in previous congresses. At least four such bills were introduced in the 116th Congress—including the Open Courts Act of 2020 (H.R. 8235), the Twenty-First Century Courts Act (H.R. 6017), and the Electronic Court Records Reform Act of 2019 (H.R. 1164 and S. 2064). In the 116th Congress, the House passed H.R. 8235; the Senate did not act on the bill. The Judicial Conference expressed some opposition to that proposal due to financial and operational impact on the judiciary..."
Court Electronic Records