法院是公共利益的数据守护者

IF 0.7 4区 社会学 Q2 LAW
Emily S. Taylor Poppe
{"title":"法院是公共利益的数据守护者","authors":"Emily S. Taylor Poppe","doi":"10.3138/utlj-2023-0005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In an increasingly digital world, where data-driven decision making and technology-enhanced workflows are the norm, civil courts lag behind. Despite the rise in electronic filing, many civil court records remain inaccessible and unused by court administrators and other government actors. Meanwhile, for-profit companies increasingly compile court records into massive datasets that facilitate sophisticated legal analytics. This discrepancy between public and private approaches results in unfulfilled potential for court records to inform court operations, procedural rule making, and substantive policy. This article argues for a future in which courts address these failures and take on the role of data guardians for the public good.","PeriodicalId":46289,"journal":{"name":"University of Toronto Law Journal","volume":" ","pages":"-"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Courts as Data Guardians for the Public Good\",\"authors\":\"Emily S. Taylor Poppe\",\"doi\":\"10.3138/utlj-2023-0005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In an increasingly digital world, where data-driven decision making and technology-enhanced workflows are the norm, civil courts lag behind. Despite the rise in electronic filing, many civil court records remain inaccessible and unused by court administrators and other government actors. Meanwhile, for-profit companies increasingly compile court records into massive datasets that facilitate sophisticated legal analytics. This discrepancy between public and private approaches results in unfulfilled potential for court records to inform court operations, procedural rule making, and substantive policy. This article argues for a future in which courts address these failures and take on the role of data guardians for the public good.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46289,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"University of Toronto Law Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"-\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"University of Toronto Law Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3138/utlj-2023-0005\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"University of Toronto Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3138/utlj-2023-0005","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在一个日益数字化的世界里,数据驱动的决策和技术增强的工作流程成为常态,民事法院落后了。尽管电子备案有所增加,但法院管理人员和其他政府行为者仍然无法访问和使用许多民事法庭记录。与此同时,营利性公司越来越多地将法庭记录汇编成庞大的数据集,以便于进行复杂的法律分析。公共和私人方法之间的这种差异导致法庭记录为法庭运作、程序规则制定和实质性政策提供信息的潜力未得到实现。这篇文章为法院解决这些失败并为公共利益扮演数据守护者的角色的未来辩护。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Courts as Data Guardians for the Public Good
In an increasingly digital world, where data-driven decision making and technology-enhanced workflows are the norm, civil courts lag behind. Despite the rise in electronic filing, many civil court records remain inaccessible and unused by court administrators and other government actors. Meanwhile, for-profit companies increasingly compile court records into massive datasets that facilitate sophisticated legal analytics. This discrepancy between public and private approaches results in unfulfilled potential for court records to inform court operations, procedural rule making, and substantive policy. This article argues for a future in which courts address these failures and take on the role of data guardians for the public good.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
16.70%
发文量
26
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信