[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 157 (2011), Part 3]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 3938]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




INTRODUCTION ON THE 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, AND FOR 
                             OTHER PURPOSES

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. JOHN CONYERS, JR.

                              of michigan

                    in the house of representatives

                         Monday, March 14, 2011

  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, every day, our federal judges make 
decisions in cases that directly and personally affect lives. They may 
find someone guilty and sentence that person to a lengthy prison 
sentence. They may rule against someone for thousands of dollars. Or, 
they may dismiss a medical malpractice case. Chicago district judge 
Joan Humphrey Lefkow did the latter and tragically, shortly thereafter, 
the plaintiff in that case went to her home and murdered her husband 
and mother in 2005.
  One way a disgruntled litigant can learn of a federal judge's home 
address and avenge a ruling is by requesting a copy of the judge's 
financial disclosure report under the Ethics in Government Act. 
Information in financial disclosure reports can reveal the filer's or a 
family member's residence or regular presence at an unsecured location 
such as a spouse's place of employment. Fortunately, Section 105(b)(3) 
of the Ethics in Government Act (5 U.S.C. App), allows the Judicial 
Conference to redact statutorily required information in a judge's or 
judiciary employee's financial disclosure report in circumstances where 
release of the information could endanger the filer or the filer's 
family.
  The Judicial Conference uses its redaction authority carefully. Under 
the regulations that the Judicial Conference promulgated in accordance 
with the statute, there must be a clear nexus between a security risk 
and the information for which redaction is sought, before redaction 
will be permitted. As required by the statute, the Judicial Conference 
reports to Congress annually on the number of redactions and the 
reasons for them, usually involving over 200 judges and judicial 
employees per year.
  This redaction authority is set to expire on December 31, 2011, 
pursuant to the ``Court Security Improvement Act of 2007'' (Pub. L. No. 
110-177). Allowing this redaction authority to sunset will create 
tremendous security risks to judges and judiciary employees. 
Consequently, I am introducing legislation today which would extend the 
authority of the Judicial Conference to redact sensitive information 
contained in judges' financial disclosure reports. Where we can prevent 
tragedies such as Judge Lefkow's from happening, I believe we should. 
As our federal judges uphold the law, they should not have to worry 
about whether they or their family members will be harmed.
  I, together with my good friends, Representative Cohen and 
Representative Hank Johnson, ask Members on both sides of the aisle to 
join me in supporting this critical and timely legislation. We 
fervently hope that Congress will act expeditiously on it.

                          ____________________