A recent study by Incogni, a data deletion company, uncovered that over half of U.S. appellate court judges have their personal information—including home addresses, phone numbers, and names of relatives—listed on people search sites run by unregulated data brokers. The study revealed that approximately 56% of judges working in the country’s 12 regional circuit courts have likely had their personal data exposed.
Researchers found that around 50 of the 270 judges studied appeared on five or more data broker sites, with little effort required to obtain their information. By simply using the judges’ names, ages, cities, and states, the researchers were able to pinpoint personal details, sometimes overcoming small errors in names and ages through an algorithm.
This alarming trend underscores the growing threats faced by judges, including doxxing, threats, and violent retaliation. In recent incidents, such as the bomb threat directed at Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s sister following her ruling against the Trump administration, the risks have become more evident.
Legislation to Address Privacy Concerns
In response to these dangers, states are increasingly enacting legislation to protect judges and other public servants from data broker exploitation. After the tragic shooting of a New Jersey federal judge’s son in 2020, New Jersey passed “Daniel’s Law,” which mandates data brokers to remove personal information about law enforcement and judges within 10 days of a request, with severe penalties for non-compliance. Vermont is following suit, with a similar bill recently passed in the House of Representatives.
Monique Priestley, the Vermont lawmaker behind the legislation, emphasized that Vermont will continue to fight for privacy protections despite pressure from industry lobbyists. In addition to state-level actions, President Joe Biden signed a federal version of Daniel’s Law in December 2022, protecting federal judges and Supreme Court justices.
Growing Threats and Concerns for Judges
Personal safety concerns are a daily reality for many judges, whose personal data is often not just accessible but commercialized. A separate study revealed that more than half of state judges had been threatened, with 2% even attacked. Many others expressed concerns about their information being posted online, underscoring the urgency of addressing privacy and safety for those in judicial roles.
The exposure of judges’ personal data highlights a critical issue: while judges face increasing personal safety threats, their information remains alarmingly accessible, revealing the need for stronger protections against the data broker industry.