Judges have incredibly demanding jobs, even if they did ask for the job by running for election or appointment. That difficulty is compounded by safety concerns for the bench and their families. Local courthouses prepare as best they can with extra security for high-profile cases, potentially dangerous individuals appearing in person, and if necessary, escorts to and from work and home.
Michigan’s Senate Bill 82 (2025), or the “Judicial Protection Act,” aims to mitigate some of the safety concerns by limiting public disclosure of personal information about judges and their family. Immediate family members are those who share a permanent residence with the judge, including spouses, children, parents and any other familial relative of the judge.
Personal identifying information, or PII, has a lengthy list of what is included: birth date, permanent residence address (except for city and township), address of other property regularly used as a dwelling, phone numbers, driver’s license or state ID number, Social Security number, personal email, tax IDs, credit, debit card and bank account information, license plate or other unique identifier of a vehicle, school or daycare information, including schedules and routes taken to and from the location, and employment location other than the court house.
Judges can submit a request in writing to remove a public posting or PII displayed about the judge or her immediate family. The request to remove the details would remain in effect until the judge provides a written request to lift or modify the original ask. Once the request has been made, any current public displays of this information are to be removed no later than five business days after the request was received. If compliance is not had, the judge or her family member can commence a civil action to compel the compliance.
Any PII on the written request is also exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act. Public availability of the PII elsewhere is not a defense to violating the terms of the Judicial Protection Act.
Exceptions to the proposed act include if the information is relevant and contained within a news report, editorial or other speech “on a matter of public concern;” if the PII is needed to effectuate the judge’s request, voluntary disclosure, internal use for businesses, health and safety purposes, credit reporting, and the list goes on (really, it does – it spans from subsection a through o).
Given past violence directed at judges and their families, this act is long overdue. The Judicial Protection Act will allow members of the bench to better perform their duties knowing there is an extra layer of safety around those they love.
