A recent study revealed that over 50% of U.S. appellate court judges have their personal information exposed online. This data, including home addresses and phone numbers, is often listed on unregulated data broker sites. Researchers found that approximately 56% of the 270 judges in the study had their information on these sites, with 50 judges appearing on five or more. Identifying the data was relatively simple, as researchers used only the judges’ name, age, city, and state, with algorithms helping to resolve minor discrepancies.
The findings raise serious concerns about the safety of judges, who are increasingly targeted by doxxing, threats, and violent retaliation. Recently, Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s family faced a bomb threat after her ruling against the Trump administration. In July 2020, a disgruntled lawyer killed the son of a New Jersey federal judge, leading to the creation of Daniel’s Law, which requires data brokers to remove personal information of law enforcement officials, including judges, within 10 days. This law has gained support and inspired similar legislation in Vermont.
Vermont lawmakers, led by Monique Priestley, continue to push for legislation that protects judges from data brokers.
After a previous bill failed to gain approval, a new version has passed the state’s House of Representatives and now heads to the Senate. Atlas Data Privacy, a consumer privacy company, has actively supported this legislation, highlighting the ongoing struggle against corporate lobbyists and the data broker industry.
The battle in Vermont is seen as a critical test for privacy rights for at-risk public servants like judges.
Federal action has also been taken, with President Joe Biden signing a version of Daniel’s Law in December 2022, extending protections to federal judges and Supreme Court justices. This law prohibits the online listing of personal data for federal judges and imposes penalties on data brokers who fail to comply. Personal safety concerns are now a daily reality for judges, as their personal data is not only publicly accessible but has also been commercialized for profit. A separate study found that over half of state judges have faced threats, with many expressing concerns about their data being exposed.
Reference:
