In Big Leap, SCOTUS Announces E-Filing Is Coming Soon
The U.S. Supreme Court announced Thursday that electronic filing of case documents will be required beginning on November 13 and virtually all new filings will be available free of cost to the public. The system will not be part of PACER, the longstanding operation used by lower federal courts, which charges for documents by the page.
August 03, 2017 at 11:08 AM
8 minute read
Better late than never, the U.S. Supreme Court announced Thursday that electronic filing of case documents will be required beginning on November 13.
A press release from the court said, “A quick link on the Court's website homepage will provide access to the new system, developed in-house to provide prompt and easy access to case documents. Once the system is in place, virtually all new filings will be accessible without cost to the public and legal community.”
The system will not be part of PACER, the longstanding operation used by lower federal courts, which charges for documents by the page up to 30 pages. A new button called “Electronic Filing” appeared today on the court's main page.
Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. in a 2014 report, said electronic filing “may be operational as soon as 2016” but all the pieces came together a bit later. A revamp of the court's website www.supremecourt.gov launched July 28, setting the stage for the new filing system.
The release said practitioners will “initially” be required to file paper versions of filings as well as electronic versions. Petitions and briefs filed by pro se litigants, some of which may not fit required formats of the court, will be scanned by court staff and then posted on the electronic docket.
Social media and practitioners praised the court's long-awaited plan.
“It's certainly a positive step that will increase public access” to court information, said Pratik Shah, co-head of the Supreme Court and Appellate practice at Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld. “We won't have to rely on SCOTUSblog as much.”
Shah added that practitioners are accustomed to electronic filing in other courts, so the high court's new program will not cause any difficulties. Practitioners will have to register closer to the start date for the program.
Fix the Court, a group that advocates for greater transparency at the Supreme Court, gave an uncharacteristic thumbs-up on Twitter. “We rarely get to say this, so we'll do so in all caps, THANK YOU, #SCOTUS!
Related Articles:
|Better late than never, the U.S. Supreme Court announced Thursday that electronic filing of case documents will be required beginning on November 13.
A press release from the court said, “A quick link on the Court's website homepage will provide access to the new system, developed in-house to provide prompt and easy access to case documents. Once the system is in place, virtually all new filings will be accessible without cost to the public and legal community.”
The system will not be part of PACER, the longstanding operation used by lower federal courts, which charges for documents by the page up to 30 pages. A new button called “Electronic Filing” appeared today on the court's main page.
Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. in a 2014 report, said electronic filing “may be operational as soon as 2016” but all the pieces came together a bit later. A revamp of the court's website www.supremecourt.gov launched July 28, setting the stage for the new filing system.
The release said practitioners will “initially” be required to file paper versions of filings as well as electronic versions. Petitions and briefs filed by pro se litigants, some of which may not fit required formats of the court, will be scanned by court staff and then posted on the electronic docket.
Social media and practitioners praised the court's long-awaited plan.
“It's certainly a positive step that will increase public access” to court information, said Pratik Shah, co-head of the Supreme Court and Appellate practice at
Shah added that practitioners are accustomed to electronic filing in other courts, so the high court's new program will not cause any difficulties. Practitioners will have to register closer to the start date for the program.
Fix the Court, a group that advocates for greater transparency at the Supreme Court, gave an uncharacteristic thumbs-up on Twitter. “We rarely get to say this, so we'll do so in all caps, THANK YOU, #SCOTUS!
Related Articles:
|This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllRoberts Calls Court's Relationship With Congress 'Strained.' Who's to Blame?
Judicial Conference Declines Democratic Request to Refer Justice Thomas to DOJ
Chief Justice Roberts Ends Year With Defense Against 'Illegitimate' Attacks on Judiciary
Trending Stories
- 1Restoring Trust in the Courts Starts in New York
- 2'Pull Back the Curtain': Ex-NFL Players Seek Discovery in Lawsuit Over League's Disability Plan
- 3Tensions Run High at Final Hearing Before Manhattan Congestion Pricing Takes Effect
- 4Improper Removal to Fed. Court Leads to $100K Bill for Blue Cross Blue Shield
- 5Michael Halpern, Beloved Key West Attorney, Dies at 72
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250