[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 135 (Tuesday, September 13, 2011)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1608-E1609]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




    EXTENSION OF REDACTION AUTHORITY CONCERNING SENSITIVE SECURITY 
                              INFORMATION

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                        HON. SHEILA JACKSON LEE

                                of texas

                    in the house of representatives

                       Monday, September 12, 2011

  Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I support H.R. 1059, a bill to 
protect the safety of judges by extending the authority of the Judicial 
Conference to redact sensitive information contained in their financial 
disclosure reports. This legislation will provide a vital safety 
measure for judges who have dedicated their lives to serving the 
public.

[[Page E1609]]

  As a senior Member of both the Judiciary and Homeland Security 
committees, I have worked tirelessly to ensure the safety and integrity 
of those who are members of the judiciary. The Ethics in Government Act 
requires judges, like Members of Congress and other high ranking public 
officials to file annual financial disclosure reports. This requirement 
serves to bolster the confidence of the public in the professional 
integrity of individuals who serve their community.
  Although the intent of the Act is to bolster public confidence in the 
judiciary it has an unintended consequence inherent in full public 
disclosure. Full financial disclosure impacts the personal safety of 
judges, particularly the safety of judges who sentence criminals. Some 
of the information contained in financial disclosure reports could 
reveal information which pertains to the schools, workplaces, and homes 
of judges and their families. This type of information provides easy 
access to personal information that could be used by an individual to 
intimidate or harm a judge or her family. In order to mitigate these 
risks, section 7 of the Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act of 
1998 allows the Judicial Conference to redact information found in 
financial disclosures that would place a judge or their family at risk.
  This legislation does not exempt judicial employees and judges from 
filing financial disclosures. The Judicial Conference's Committee on 
Financial Disclosures works in coordination with the U.S. Marshals 
Service to determine the merit of requests for redaction. The Judicial 
conference reports that between 2007 and 2010, of the 17,658 financial 
disclosure reports filed, there were only 750 redaction requests, or 
4.2 percent of the reports filed. There were 645 redaction requests 
that were fully granted, and 70 that were partially granted.
  This legislation protects judges and their families from those that 
may seek to harm or intimidate the judge. The majority of redaction 
requests that were approved contained information that indicated the 
whereabouts of the filer's family on a regular basis, or the residence 
at which the filing party lived. H.R. 1059 does not exempt anyone from 
fulfilling their requirement to file a financial disclosure.
  In the 110th Congress, my colleagues and I extended the authorizing 
section of the Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act twice to 
ensure continued protection of our judges and their families. The last 
extension will expire on December 31, 2011, leaving thousands of 
dedicated public servants and their loved ones vulnerable to harm or 
harassment.
  I applaud my friend from Michigan, the Ranking Member of the 
Judiciary Committee for introducing this important legislation to 
protect judges and judicial employees. I urge my colleagues to lend 
their support to the bill.

                          ____________________