Four years in the making, today we are announcing a new one-of-a-kind database containing the investment and conflict information for every federal judge. Spanning 17 years, this database was extracted from over 250,000 pages of judicial financial records. free.law/2021/09/28/ann…
In tandem with developing this new data, we collaborated with a team of investigative journalists at The Wall Street Journal.

They spent the past several months diving into the data. The first of their groundbreaking reports is out today: wsj.com/articles/131-f…
To build this database, we collected over 27,000 financial disclosure forms filed by federal judges, magistrates, and justices. We are releasing over 1.5M investment transactions, 29,000 reimbursements, 1,700 gifts, and more. Details here: courtlistener.com/coverage/finan…
All of this will be available via our APIs, replicated database, and website in the coming days. We're working on it! 😅
Financial disclosures by judges were mandated in 1978 by the Ethics in Gov't Act, a Watergate transparency reform. Until today, these forms have never been compiled into a database. It was too hard to get the documents and too complicated to extract the info they contained.
So, 43 years after these forms were mandated, we're thrilled to be finally putting them online for public inspection. To learn more about the project and the coming timeline, please see our post explaining everything: free.law/2021/09/28/ann…
Finally, if you're not familiar with us, we're a non-profit that's dedicated to improving the legal ecosystem. We rely on donations to keep the lights on. Huge technical projects like this are extraordinarily expensive. Please support us if you can. free.law/donate/
Here's a better link to the main story: wsj.com/articles/131-f…

Here's how the WSJ did it with our new database: wsj.com/articles/how-t…

Here's a data viz: wsj.com/articles/hidde…

Here's a sidebar about the law: wsj.com/articles/a-pos…
"In the 685 violations uncovered by the Journal’s investigation, 56 judges have since directed court clerks to notify parties in 328 lawsuits that they violated the stock-ownership rule and should have recused themselves. "
"When judges participated in such cases, about two-thirds of their rulings on motions that were contested came down in favor of their or their family’s financial interests. "
"“I dropped the ball. Thank you for helping me stay on my toes the way I’m supposed to.”
— Judge Lewis Babcock

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Free Law Project ⚖

Free Law Project ⚖ Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @FreeLawProject

26 May
Big new feature today: Tagging! You can now use tags on CourtListener to create private or public collections of dockets! courtlistener.com/help/tags/
We plan to allow you to tag documents or other resources soon. At launch you can tag dockets however you please, and then create detailed webpages for your tags. The help text has the details: courtlistener.com/help/tags/
In addition to this great new feature, we've got a few bonus features. First, CourtListener just got faster. You should notice it a bit, particularly on slower connections.
Read 7 tweets
25 May
The judicial branch commissioned @18F to do an 11-week study of PACER/CM/ECF. The result is a monumental leap forward in the effort to fix the PACER problem. Finally, we have some details about what's happening with this vital resource. A few notes…
First, if you're in the legal, technology, or government space, you should read this thing. From technology to contracting to how PACER/CM/ECF works, we've never seen so many best practices in one place. Dip this document in bronze so it'll last forever: free.law/pdf/pacer-path…
Now, some highlights (but go read it!). First, the bottom line: "The judiciary should build a new system."
Read 11 tweets
15 Sep 20
The House Judicial Committee just came out strongly in favor of the "Free PACER" bill. The quotes are just incredible. We'll put some here....
Nadler: "Judiciary records systems have long lagged behind modern standards of accessibility and openness."

"It is a disservice that in today's digital age the public's access to public records and public proceedings is so resource-intensive and burdensome."
More Nadler: "This does not reflect the modern standards the public deserves"

"it is indfensible that the public must pay fees...to know what is happening in their own courts."
Read 14 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(