[House Report 115-332]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
115th Congress } { Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session } { 115-332
======================================================================
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
_______
September 26, 2017.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on
the State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Goodlatte, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 3229]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the
bill (H.R. 3229) 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, having considered the same, report
favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill
do pass.
CONTENTS
Page
Purpose and Summary.............................................. 2
Background and Need for the Legislation.......................... 2
Hearings......................................................... 3
Committee Consideration.......................................... 3
Committee Votes.................................................. 3
Committee Oversight Findings..................................... 3
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures........................ 3
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate........................ 3
Duplication of Federal Programs.................................. 4
Disclosure of Directed Rule Makings.............................. 4
Performance Goals and Objectives................................. 5
Advisory on Earmarks............................................. 5
Section-by-Section Analysis...................................... 5
Agency Views..................................................... 6
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............ 8
Purpose and Summary
H.R. 3229 extends the current redaction authority for
certain judicial public disclosure filings for another ten
years until December 31, 2027.
Background and Need for the Legislation
Under the Ethics in Government Act, federal judges are
required to make annual financial disclosures similar to those
made by Members of Congress, senior government officials, and
certain Congressional staff. There have been longstanding
security concerns related to federal judges being targeted by
those who appear before them. Federal judges were assassinated
in 1979, 1988, and 1989 and the spouse and mother of a federal
judge were killed in 2005 by a disgruntled medical malpractice
litigant. Individuals targeting judges for harassment have also
been known to file false liens on property owned by judges and
their families. Harassers could use judicial financial
disclosure reports to more easily identify such property.
In 1998, authority was given to the Judicial Conference to
redact for the following three years, at the request of
individual judges, portions of their financial disclosure
information that could be used to target judges where an actual
threat exists.\1\ An example of this would be a home address or
the address of a vacation home, but not the name of the company
holding the mortgage on that property. A judge who seeks
redaction must request it from a committee of the Judicial
Conference which then determines whether or not the request is
warranted based upon input from the U.S. Marshals Service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\P.L. 105-318.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This judge-only redaction authority was then extended to
2005 by P.L. 107-126. To respond to threats against family
members, P.L. 110-24 extended the scope of the redaction
authority to cover the information of immediate family members.
Under the expanded redaction authority, information that could
potentially be used by someone seeking to harm a judge's
family, such as the work location of a spouse or child of a
judge with active threats on their life, could also now be
redacted. The same legislation also extended the authority
until 2009. Under broader court security legislation enacted
later in 2008, redaction authority was further extended until
2011.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\P.L. 110-177.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally in 2011, P.L. 112-84 extended redaction authority
to December 31, 2017. The 2011 bill was reported out of the
House Judiciary Committee by a voice vote and it passed on the
House floor by a vote of 384-0. Previous reauthorizations have
similarly been uncontroversial with the only issue being how
long should the extension be and/or should it simply be
permanent. Although the House has consistently supported
permanent reauthorization, H.R. 3229 extends the existing
redaction authority for ten years until December 31, 2027, due
to previous opposition to a permanent reauthorization by the
Senate.
Hearings
The Committee on the Judiciary held no hearings on H.R.
3229.
Committee Consideration
On September 7, 2017, the Committee met in open session and
ordered the bill H.R. 3229 favorably reported without
amendment, by voice vote, a quorum being present.
Committee Votes
In compliance with clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, the Committee advises that there
were no recorded votes during the Committee's consideration of
H.R. 3229.
Committee Oversight Findings
In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules
of the House of Representatives, the Committee advises that the
findings and recommendations of the Committee, based on
oversight activities under clause 2(b)(1) of rule X of the
Rules of the House of Representatives, are incorporated in the
descriptive portions of this report.
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures
Clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives is inapplicable because this legislation does
not provide new budgetary authority or increased tax
expenditures.
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate
In compliance with clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules
of the House of Representatives, the Committee sets forth, with
respect to the bill, H.R. 3229 the following estimate and
comparison prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget
Office under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of
1974:
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, September 18, 2017.
Hon. Bob Goodlatte, Chairman,
Committee on the Judiciary,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 3229, 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, and for other purposes.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Janani
Shankaran, who can be reached at 226-2860.
Sincerely,
Keith Hall,
Director.
Enclosure.
cc: Honorable John Conyers, Jr.
Ranking Member
H.R. 3229--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, and for other
purposes.
As ordered reported by the House Committee on the Judiciary on
September 7, 2017.
The Ethics in Government Act of 1978 requires certain
government officials to file public disclosures of their
financial and employment history. H.R. 3229 would extend
through 2027 the authority of the Judicial Conference to redact
sensitive information contained in financial disclosure reports
of judicial officers and employees if the Judicial Conference
determines that such disclosure could endanger the individual.
Under current law, that authority expires on December 31, 2017.
Based on information from the Administrative Office of the
United States Courts regarding the number of requests to redact
sensitive information, CBO estimates that implementing H.R.
3229 would have no significant effect on the federal budget.
Enacting H.R. 3229 would not affect direct spending or
revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply.
CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 3229 would not increase
net direct spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four
consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2028.
H.R. 3229 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and
would not affect the budgets of state, local, or tribal
governments.
On August 16, 2017, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for S.
1584 as ordered reported by the Senate Committee on Homeland
Security and Governmental Affairs on July 26, 2017. The bills
are similar, and CBO's estimates of the budgetary effects are
the same.
The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Janani
Shankaran. The estimate was approved by H. Samuel Papenfuss,
Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.
Duplication of Federal Programs
No provision of H.R. 3229 establishes or reauthorizes a
program of the Federal government known to be duplicative of
another Federal program, a program that was included in any
report from the Government Accountability Office to Congress
pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111-139, or a program
related to a program identified in the most recent Catalog of
Federal Domestic Assistance.
Disclosure of Directed Rule Makings
The Committee estimates that H.R. 3229 specifically directs
to be completed no specific rule makings within the meaning of
5 U.S.C. 551.
Performance Goals and Objectives
The Committee states that pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, H.R.
3229, extends the existing judicial redaction authority for an
additional ten years.
Advisory on Earmarks
In accordance with clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, H.R. 3229 does not contain any
congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff
benefits as defined in clause 9(e), 9(f), or 9(g) of Rule XXI.
Section-by-Section Analysis
The following discussion describes the bill as reported by
the Committee.
Section 1. Section 1 amends Section 105(b)(3) of the Ethics
in Government Act of 1978, found at 5 U.S.C. App., by striking
the existing expiration year of 2017 and replacing it with
2027, thereby extending the existing judicial redaction
authority until December 31, 2027.
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported
In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new
matter is printed in italic, and existing law in which no
change is proposed is shown in roman):
ETHICS IN GOVERNMENT ACT OF 1978
* * * * * * *
TITLE I--FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL PERSONNEL
* * * * * * *
CUSTODY OF AND PUBLIC ACCESS TO REPORTS
Sec. 105. (a) Each agency, each supervising ethics office in
the executive or judicial branch, the Clerk of the House of
Representatives, and the Secretary of the Senate shall make
available to the public, in accordance with subsection (b),
each report filed under this title with such agency or office
or with the Clerk or the Secretary of the Senate, except that--
(1) this section does not require public availability
of a report filed by any individual in the Office of
the Director of National Intelligence, the Central
Intelligence Agency, the Defense Intelligence Agency,
the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, or the
National Security Agency, or any individual engaged in
intelligence activities in any agency of the United
States, if the President finds or has found that, due
to the nature of the office or position occupied by
such individual, public disclosure of such report
would, be revealing the identity of the individual or
other sensitive information, compromise the national
interest of the United States; and such individuals may
be authorized, notwithstanding section 104(a), to file
such additional reports as are necessary to protect
their identity from public disclosure if the President
first finds or has found that such filing is necessary
in the national interest; and
(2) any report filed by an independent counsel whose
identity has not been disclosed by the division of the
court under chapter 40 of title 28, United States Code,
and any report filed by any person appointed by that
independent counsel under such chapter, shall not be
made available to the public under this title.
(b)(1) Except as provided in the second sentence of this
subsection, each agency, each supervising ethics office in the
executive or judicial branch, the Clerk of the House of
Representatives, and the Secretary of the Senate shall, within
thirty days after any report is received under this title by
such agency or office or by the Clerk or the Secretary of the
Senate, as the case may be, permit inspection of such report by
or furnish a copy of such report to any person requesting such
inspection or copy. With respect to any report required to be
filed by May 15 of any year, such report shall be made
available for public inspection within 30 calendar days after
May 15 of such year or within 30 days of the date of filing of
such a report for which an extension is granted pursuant to
section 101(g). The agency, office, Clerk, or Secretary of the
Senate, as the case may be may require a reasonable fee to be
paid in any amount which is found necessary to recover the cost
of reproduction or mailing of such report excluding any salary
of any employee involved in such reproduction or mailing. A
copy of such report may be furnished without charge or at a
reduced charge if it is determined that waiver or reduction of
the fee is in the public interest.
(2) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), a report may not be made
available under this section to any person nor may any copy
thereof be provided under this section to any person except
upon a written application by such person stating--
(A) that person's name, occupation and address;
(B) the name and address of any other person or
organization on whose behalf the inspection or copy is
requested; and
(C) that such person is aware of the prohibitions on
the obtaining or use of the report.
Any such application shall be made available to the public
throughout the period during which the report is made available
to the public.
(3)(A) This section does not require the immediate and
unconditional availability of reports filed by an individual
described in section 109(8) or 109(10) of this Act if a finding
is made by the Judicial Conference, in consultation with United
States Marshals Service, that revealing personal and sensitive
information could endanger that individual or a family member
of that individual.
(B) A report may be redacted pursuant to this paragraph
only--
(i) to the extent necessary to protect the individual
who filed the report or a family member of that
individual; and
(ii) for as long as the danger to such individual
exists.
(C) The Administrative Office of the United States Courts
shall submit to the Committees on the Judiciary of the House of
Representatives and of the Senate and the Senate Committee on
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs and the House
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform an annual report
with respect to the operation of this paragraph including--
(i) the total number of reports redacted pursuant to
this paragraph;
(ii) the total number of individuals whose reports
have been redacted pursuant to this paragraph;
(iii) the types of threats against individuals whose
reports are redacted, if appropriate;
(iv) the nature or type of information redacted;
(v) what steps or procedures are in place to ensure
that sufficient information is available to litigants
to determine if there is a conflict of interest;
(vi) principles used to guide implementation of
redaction authority; and
(vii) any public complaints received relating to
redaction.
(D) The Judicial Conference, in consultation with the
Department of Justice, shall issue regulations setting forth
the circumstances under which redaction is appropriate under
this paragraph and the procedures for redaction.
(E) This paragraph shall expire on December 31, [2017] 2027,
and apply to filings through calendar year [2017] 2027.
(c)(1) It shall be unlawful for any person to obtain or use a
report--
(A) for any unlawful purpose;
(B) for any commercial purpose, other than by news
and communications media for dissemination to the
general public;
(C) for determining or establishing the credit rating
of any individual; or
(D) for use, directly or indirectly, in the
solicitation of money for any political, charitable, or
other purpose.
(2) The Attorney General may bring a civil action against any
person who obtains or uses a report for any purpose prohibited
in paragraph (1) of this subsection. The court in which such
action is brought may assess against such person a penalty in
any amount not to exceed $10,000. Such remedy shall be in
addition to any other remedy available under statutory or
common law.
(d)(1) Any report filed with or transmitted to an agency or
supervising ethics office or to the Clerk of the House of
Representatives or the Secretary of the Senate pursuant to this
title shall be retained by such agency or office or by the
Clerk of the House of Representatives or the Secretary of the
Senate, as the case may be.
(2) Such report shall be made available to the public--
(A) in the case of a Member of Congress until a date
that is 6 years from the date the individual ceases to
be a Member of Congress; and
(B) in the case of all other reports filed pursuant
to this title, for a period of 6 years after receipt of
the report.
(3) After the relevant time period identified under paragraph
(2), the report shall be destroyed unless needed in an ongoing
investigation, except that in the case of an individual who
filed the report pursuant to section 101(b) and was not
subsequently confirmed by the Senate, or who filed the report
pursuant to section 101(c) and was not subsequently elected,
such reports shall be destroyed 1 year after the individual
either is no longer under consideration by the Senate or is no
longer a candidate for nomination or election to the Office of
President, Vice President, or as a Member of Congress, unless
needed in an ongoing investigation or inquiry.
* * * * * * *
[all]