Like Causes?

Install the App
TRY NOW

house Bill H.R. 3229

Should Judges' Personal Information be Redacted From Their Financial Disclosures for Another 10 Years?

Argument in favor

Judges need to be free from threats and harassment carried out by those who want to undermine the judiciary’s independence. This ensures they can keep sensitive personal information private.

Rob's Opinion
···
09/23/2017
My dad's a District judge and has received death threats after discussing a case on CNN and FOX News leading us to boost security for our house and making a college kid paranoid that he'd receive a call that his family was attacked. Let's leave the family out of this
Like (46)
Follow
Share
Joyce's Opinion
···
09/23/2017
Actually the families should be off limits for all public servants, especially the President. Yes even the ones you don't like.
Like (11)
Follow
Share
Mirek's Opinion
···
09/23/2017
Being a judge can be a dangerous job. Human emotions run the whole spectrum in court. Judges must be able to protect themselves by redacting personal information that may put them or their families in jeopardy.
Like (9)
Follow
Share

Argument opposed

If a person uses a judge’s financial disclosures to obtain information on them, they’d be liable for any crimes or harassment they carry out against the judge or their family. There’s no need to redact that information.

gatorair's Opinion
···
09/23/2017
They should be under the same rule of law as the rest of the country. No special treatment is required here.
Like (67)
Follow
Share
Jack's Opinion
···
09/23/2017
Judges are no more immune to corruption than any judicial member. Complete transparency, i.e., full disclosure of financial resources, is a logical way of monitoring potential corruption. If the concern is safety, then require full disclosure but implement safeguards on the information itself to protect it from public disclosure. A fitting example is Trump's tax returns...what corruption might have been revealed if he had been forced to reveal his financial dealings during his candidacy. A corrupt politician welcomes the darkness of non-disclosure as a means of remaining corrupt.
Like (54)
Follow
Share
Mart's Opinion
···
09/23/2017
That's what it means, full disclosure. Think of Hugo Black's Klan affiliation! That should have been absolutely disclosed. That personal information determined many cases incorrectly! All information, or don't ask to be a judge.
Like (47)
Follow
Share
    My dad's a District judge and has received death threats after discussing a case on CNN and FOX News leading us to boost security for our house and making a college kid paranoid that he'd receive a call that his family was attacked. Let's leave the family out of this
    Like (46)
    Follow
    Share
    They should be under the same rule of law as the rest of the country. No special treatment is required here.
    Like (67)
    Follow
    Share
    Judges are no more immune to corruption than any judicial member. Complete transparency, i.e., full disclosure of financial resources, is a logical way of monitoring potential corruption. If the concern is safety, then require full disclosure but implement safeguards on the information itself to protect it from public disclosure. A fitting example is Trump's tax returns...what corruption might have been revealed if he had been forced to reveal his financial dealings during his candidacy. A corrupt politician welcomes the darkness of non-disclosure as a means of remaining corrupt.
    Like (54)
    Follow
    Share
    That's what it means, full disclosure. Think of Hugo Black's Klan affiliation! That should have been absolutely disclosed. That personal information determined many cases incorrectly! All information, or don't ask to be a judge.
    Like (47)
    Follow
    Share
    Judges are employees, just like the rest of us. I want all info of public servants transparent.
    Like (37)
    Follow
    Share
    Don't disclose their addresses or family members but DISCLOSE all Financial information....President's too and make it retroactive!
    Like (31)
    Follow
    Share
    When you work for the public, everyone has the right to all information about you. Otherwise pick a different occupation.
    Like (24)
    Follow
    Share
    Full disclosure is required to ensure judges are truly impartial. If a person uses a judge’s financial disclosures to obtain information on them, they’d be liable for any crimes or harassment they carry out against the judge or their family. There’s no need to redact that information.
    Like (15)
    Follow
    Share
    Actually the families should be off limits for all public servants, especially the President. Yes even the ones you don't like.
    Like (11)
    Follow
    Share
    Being a judge can be a dangerous job. Human emotions run the whole spectrum in court. Judges must be able to protect themselves by redacting personal information that may put them or their families in jeopardy.
    Like (9)
    Follow
    Share
    Full transparency around financials but account for and redact personal information that could endanger their safety
    Like (6)
    Follow
    Share
    It's not perfectly clear to me what "sensitive" information the bill wants to protect. If it refers to judges' home addresses and other identifying information and the names, home and work addresses and other identifying information of their family members, then I'm all for it.
    Like (6)
    Follow
    Share
    No human being should be more protected than other Citizens, regardless of their employment position or social position. This theory suggests that specific people have more value in society. If it is believed that additional protections are necessary for one group of people, then the same protections shall be provided to all important people on earth. We have already seen how providing special privileges to Catholic priests or other Religious groups, has endangered our children and how providing special privileges to politicians and law enforcement has enabled them to abuse their spouses, hurt people, kill people, without having to face jail time or prison or other justice, that the rest of us are forced to.
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    Nay, only because of the situation we are in now. If people who are put in judgeships that are NOT QUALIFIED like the people he just put in office (no credentials or abilities) we need to be able to find out what qualifications they have.
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    Protect our judges
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    This looks like a reasonable, bipartisan effort. Please support.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    Judges must be held to a higher moral and ethical standard. That means shining light on how judges spend their money. If you want to be in public life, be prepared for less privacy and more scrutiny.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    Judges need to be open as are the rest of us.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    No. If they don't want to be under public scrutiny then they have made some very poor professional choices. They knew the rules of the game when they chose to play.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    The courts are increasingly showing bias in issues that affect individual citizens and corporations. More and more decisions seem to favor moneyed interests over the public good. Any attempt to hide financial information relating to government officials eliminates transparency and accountability.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    MORE