Courts as Data Guardians for the Public Good-Reference-Cited by-同舟云学术

Courts as Data Guardians for the Public Good

Published:2023-08-01 Issue:Supplement 1 Volume:73 Page:34-58
ISSN:0042-0220
Container-title:University of Toronto Law Journal
language:en
Short-container-title:University of Toronto Law Journal

Author:

Taylor Poppe Emily S¹

Affiliation:

1. Professor of Law, School of Law, University of California, Irvine, United States

Abstract

In an increasingly digital world, where data-driven decision making and technology-enhanced workflows are the norm, civil courts lag behind. Despite the rise in electronic filing, many civil court records remain inaccessible and unused by court administrators and other government actors. Meanwhile, for-profit companies increasingly compile court records into massive datasets that facilitate sophisticated legal analytics. This discrepancy between public and private approaches results in unfulfilled potential for court records to inform court operations, procedural rule making, and substantive policy. This article argues for a future in which courts address these failures and take on the role of data guardians for the public good.

Publisher

University of Toronto Press Inc. (UTPress)

Subject

Law,Sociology and Political Science

Link

https://utpjournals.press/doi/pdf/10.3138/utlj-2023-0005

Reference142 articles.

1. See e.g. Kathleen C Engel & Patricia A McCoy, The Subprime Virus: Reckless Credit, Regulatory Failure, and Next Steps (New York: Oxford University Press, 2011) at 22

2. Jacob S Rugh & Douglas S Massey, 'Racial Segregation and the American Foreclosure Crisis' (2010) 75 American Sociological Review 629 at 639.

3. See e.g. United States, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Office of Thrift Supervision, Federal Reserve System, Interagency Review of Foreclosure Policies and Practices (2011) at 2–3.

4. See e.g. United States Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, The Financial Crisis Inquiry Report: Final Report of the National Commission on the Causes of the Financial and Economic Crisis in the United States (Washington, DC: Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, 2011) at 225–6, 235–42.

5. See e.g. United States, Congressional Oversight Panel, Evaluating Progress on TARP Foreclosure Mitigation Programs (2010) at 72.