4 ms·
Ha okay I understand. But you cut off the important bit: As a consequence of this real life illiteracy, these outsiders have no clue what a triumph these syste
by jahmed 12y ago
Ha okay I understand. But you cut off the important bit:
As a consequence of this real life illiteracy, these outsiders have no clue what a triumph these systems are from a variety of perspectives such as internal management of cases to external judicial transparency. The will and skill necessary to convince the internal stakeholders (judges and lawyers) to adopt the concept of these systems (to let go of paper) and then construct a dual public/internal system with few glitches is a major milestone in the annals of good government.* This was a truly a monumental achievement. For my money, PACER and CM/ECF should be here to stay despite the present debacle.
RGK understands that this is technically pretty straightforward but going in guns blazing will not endear you to an Article 3 judge. At the end of the day you are replaceable, they aren't.
- DannyBee 12y ago"The will and skill necessary to convince the internal stakeholders (judges and lawyers) to adopt the concept of these systems (to let go of paper) and then construct a dual public/internal system with few glitches is a major milestone in the annals of good government.* " See, but i disagree with this. All it really demonstrates is a lack of high level management and drive. The AO and the judicial council could have just done this. There is enough political power and will at the top to accomplish the goal. It just wasn't used. Because of this, to me, PACER is not a triumph of good government, it is the "mission accomplished" of the government world. It stays that way. Nobody feels it has to change, because they think they already did everything there is to do.