A Republican bill with 1 Democratic cosponsor · See the cosponsor
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The Open Courts Act of 2026 requires the modernization and consolidation of electronic federal court records systems into a single centralized system. This new system will provide free public access to search, bulk access, application programming interfaces, and automated notifications for court records. The Director of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts must develop this system and ensure it meets specific design, data, and cybersecurity standards. To fund the development and ongoing maintenance of this new system, the bill adjusts certain high-volume user fees and federal agency fees. Additionally, the bill outlines rules for keeping closed case records online and requires regular oversight reviews by the Government Accountability Office.
Yes· 3 of 11
- Scored +9
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?
Significantly improves transparency by providing free public search, bulk access, and automated notifications for federal court records.
- Scored +7
Does this get reliable internet to more people?
The bill mandates open, free public access to federal court records via APIs and modern digital platforms.
- Scored +6
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
Protects lower-income filers making under $250,000 from potential new filing fees and eliminates public access costs.
The opposite
- Scored -2
Would business owners be better off under this?
High-volume users and bulk data consumers face significant new fee increases of $25,000 or greater per quarter.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Free Public Access to Records: Section 3(b) states that no fees may be charged to access any functionality of the newly created system, which makes federal court records more accessible to everyday people.
-
Protection for Lower-Income Filers: Section 3(b) establishes that any potential new filing fees will not apply to a filer who certifies that their adjusted gross income was less than $250,000, protecting everyday citizens from financial hardship.
-
Disability and Mobile Access: Section 4 ensures that the system complies with digital accessibility standards under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which benefits individuals with disabilities who need to use the court records system.
-
Automatic and Timely Information: Section 2(b) requires the system to make covered records automatically accessible to the public upon filing, ensuring transparency and timely information for the people.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Higher Fees for Heavy Users: Section 3(a) introduces additional fees of $25,000 or greater for any person other than a government agency that accrues such fees for access in a quarter or uses bulk-access functions, which could burden researchers, journalists, or businesses that rely on high-volume data.
-
Risk of New Filing Fees: Section 3(b) allows for new schedules of reasonable filing fees to be prescribed if the revenue generated from federal agencies is not sufficient to offset annual covered costs, which could potentially impact certain court users.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Protects lower-income filers making under $250,000 from potential new filing fees and eliminates public access costs. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Provides free access to federal court records and exempts individuals earning under $250,000 from potential new filing fees. Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — Mandates system compliance with digital accessibility standards under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Would students be better off under this? — Academic researchers and students benefit from free public search and bulk access capabilities for federal court records. Would business owners be better off under this? — High-volume users and bulk data consumers face significant new fee increases of $25,000 or greater per quarter.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — Significantly improves transparency by providing free public search, bulk access, and automated notifications for federal court records. Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts? — Enhances access to court dockets and case records, supporting legal transparency and procedural awareness. Does this give the federal government more power? — Consolidates federal court record systems under centralized administrative control.
- Education And Technology
- Does this get reliable internet to more people? — The bill mandates open, free public access to federal court records via APIs and modern digital platforms.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this expand the rights of people with disabilities? — The bill explicitly mandates compliance with digital accessibility standards under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 for individuals with disabilities.
- National Security And Foreign Policy
- Does this better protect the country from computer attacks? — The legislation requires the new system to adhere to strict judiciary information security frameworks and executive branch cybersecurity standards.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this make the government pay for what it commits to? — The bill includes mechanisms to transfer excess fee revenue to the Treasury and mandates regular GAO oversight.
- 6/2/2026
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in Senate
Ron WydenDemocrat · Oregon