The articles also showed how rules set by the judges ensure that their financial disclosure statements remain largely secret from the public. And they documented how the judiciary has failed to police its own members. None of us realized conflicts of this kind were occurring. Part of the problem may vanish on its own, he said, as judges across the nation review the study, recognize their own lapses and increase their vigilance. Beyond that, Bowman and other judges said fuller disclosure could help avoid such conflicts.
Federal judges file their disclosure reports only in Washington, under the current system.
Anyone seeking a copy must use a special order form, which is not available in Kansas City. All requests must be notarized. And before court officials release a single page, they notify each judge of the name and occupation of the person looking into his or her finances. Taken together, that means it is far more difficult to get disclosure statements filed by judges than those filed by U.S. senators or the president. In fact, Bowman said that during his 15 years on the bench, his forms have been reviewed only twice.