The Blog of Legal Times

, Legal Times, @ToddRuger

PACER Changes Draw Ire of Attorneys, Journalists


The federal judiciary this month removed years of court records from its online archives, drawing concern from attorneys, journalists, researchers and open-record advocates who rely on remote access to files.

This article has been archived, and is no longer available on this website.

View this content exclusively through LexisNexis® Here

Not a LexisNexis® Subscriber?

Subscribe Now

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via® and Nexis®. This includes content from The National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Legaltech News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at

What's being said

  • Bruce Burdick

    The Courts wouldn‘t be denying public access to court electronic records to try to thwart RECAP in order to rip off the public by charging even more outrageous access fees, would they? Yes, they would. Since RECAP is undercutting the outrageous $0.10 per page, by making the same documents available for free, greed has set in to try to protect this source of revenue. Ripping off the public by charging excessive fees for public domain documents has become big money for courts. Public service is not the priority of court administrators, getting extra revenue for courts to waste is the priority. It‘s disgusting Government, trying to feed on the public, as usual.

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article# 1202668069612

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.