HIGHLIGHTS

U.S. Judiciary to Increase PACER Fees to Fund Faster Court System Modernisation

Introduction

The United States federal judiciary has announced a temporary increase in fees charged for accessing court documents through PACER (Public Access to Court Electronic Records). The decision was approved by the Executive Committee of the Judicial Conference of the United States on June 26, 2026.

Beginning January 1, 2027, users will pay 12 cents per page, instead of the current 10 cents, to download court records. The additional revenue will be used to accelerate the development of a modern, secure, and technologically advanced electronic case management and public access system.

The decision follows growing cybersecurity concerns after a major cyberattack on the federal judiciary in 2025 and reflects the judiciary’s effort to modernise one of the world’s largest electronic court record systems.

What is PACER?

PACER (Public Access to Court Electronic Records) is the online database of the U.S. federal judiciary. It allows lawyers, litigants, journalists, researchers and members of the public to access federal court documents electronically.

Through PACER, users can obtain:

• Court filings
• Judgments
• Orders
• Case dockets
• Bankruptcy records
• Appellate court records

PACER is operated by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts under the supervision of the Judicial Conference of the United States.

What Changes Have Been Approved?

The judiciary has approved the following changes:

1. Increase in PACER Fees

• Current fee: 10 cents per page
• New fee: 12 cents per page
• Effective from January 1, 2027
• Applicable for five years

This is the first increase since 2012, when the fee was raised from 8 cents to 10 cents.

2. Higher Fee Waiver Threshold

To reduce the burden on occasional users, the judiciary has also increased the automatic fee exemption.

• Current exemption: $30 per quarter
• New exemption: $40 per quarter

Users whose quarterly PACER charges remain below $40 will not have to pay any fees. According to the judiciary, this means that most individual users will continue to access court records without paying anything.

Why is the Fee Being Increased?

The judiciary explained that the additional revenue is necessary to complete an accelerated technology modernisation project.

The existing electronic case management system is decades old and no longer meets modern cybersecurity and operational requirements.

According to the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts:

• The upgrade is expected to cost between $700 million and $800 million by fiscal year 2030.
• Current PACER revenue is insufficient to complete the remaining phases of the project.
• The temporary fee increase will help bridge the funding gap.

Judge Robert Conrad, Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, stated that without the modest increase, the judiciary would not be able to build the secure case management system required for the future functioning of federal courts.

Cybersecurity Concerns Behind the Decision

The decision comes after a significant cyberattack disclosed in 2025.

According to the judiciary:

• Foreign hackers allegedly gained access to sensitive court information.
• Reports indicated that confidential documents, sealed filings, and information relating to confidential informants may have been compromised.
• The incident highlighted serious vulnerabilities in the existing electronic court infrastructure.

The judiciary believes that a modern digital platform will provide stronger cybersecurity protections and better safeguard sensitive judicial records.

Financial Impact

PACER currently generates approximately $147 million annually for the federal judiciary.

The temporary increase is expected to generate additional revenue that will be dedicated to:

• Developing a modern case management system.
• Improving cybersecurity.
• Enhancing electronic public access services.
• Increasing the reliability and efficiency of court operations.

The judiciary has clarified that the fee increase is temporary and will remain in place for only five years.

Criticism of the Decision

The announcement has drawn criticism from court transparency advocates and lawmakers.

1. Public Records Should Be Free

Advocacy organisation Fix the Court criticised the increase, arguing that court records are public documents and should be freely accessible online.

According to the organisation, the actual cost of providing digital documents is only a fraction of a cent per page, making the increased fee difficult to justify.

2. Legislative Efforts Continue

Several members of the U.S. Congress have repeatedly proposed legislation to eliminate PACER fees altogether.

Earlier in June 2026, Senators John Kennedy (Republican) and Ron Wyden (Democrat) reintroduced the Open Courts Act, which seeks to make federal court records freely accessible to the public.

Supporters of the bill argue that access to judicial records promotes transparency, accountability and public confidence in the justice system.

Legal Significance

The decision reflects an ongoing balance between public access to justice and financial sustainability of judicial administration.

From a legal perspective, the development raises several important issues:

• The constitutional principle of open justice requires reasonable public access to court proceedings.
• Digital court records have become an essential part of modern judicial transparency.
• Courts must simultaneously ensure strong cybersecurity to protect confidential and sealed records.
• The debate also raises broader questions about whether citizens should pay to access public judicial information.

The proposed Open Courts Act demonstrates that the issue remains a subject of legislative debate.

Conclusion

The U.S. judiciary’s decision to temporarily increase PACER fees represents a significant investment in the future of federal court technology. While the judiciary considers the fee hike necessary to strengthen cybersecurity and modernise an ageing digital infrastructure, critics argue that public access to court records should never depend on a user’s ability to pay.

The debate ultimately highlights the continuing challenge of balancing judicial transparency, technological security, and financial sustainability in an increasingly digital justice system.

Reference

• Reuters
• Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts (PACER Announcement, 26 June 2026)
• Judicial Conference of the United States.