Three surfaces, three authoritative levels
Court-record verification splits into three surfaces, each with a different level of authority and a different verification path. Knowing which surface a document came from is the first step in deciding how to verify it.
- Federal courts. Single national portal (PACER) over individual CM/ECF instances at each district, bankruptcy, and appellate court. Coverage is comprehensive going back roughly 30 years for most courts, longer for some.
- State courts. 50 different judicial systems, each with its own portal, coverage policy, and search interface. Some states (Florida, Texas, California) have strong statewide search; others (especially rural counties) require manual courthouse visits.
- Tribunals, agencies, and arbitration. Workers compensation boards, immigration courts (EOIR), administrative agencies, AAA and JAMS arbitration. Each has its own record-keeping and access rules. EOIR has limited public access; AAA and JAMS have private dockets.
PACER: the federal court workhorse
PACER (Public Access to Court Electronic Records) is the federal judiciary's public-access system. Every federal district court, bankruptcy court, court of appeals, and the Court of International Trade publishes its electronic docket through PACER. The search interface at pacer.uscourts.gov lets users search by party name, case number, attorney, judge, and date range across all courts or a single court.
Each PACER record carries:
- A docket sheet listing every filing in chronological order.
- Per-filing PDF links produced by CM/ECF. The PDFs include the court's electronic stamp at the top edge (court name, case number, document number, date filed, page count, page number).
- Case caption, judge assignment, party list, attorney information.
- Sealed filings and minute entries are noted on the docket even when the underlying documents are restricted.
PACER charges per page viewed (USD 0.10 per page, capped at USD 3.00 per document) with quarterly bills waived under USD 30. For frequent users, the bills become real money; for occasional users, the costs are trivial. CourtListener (Free Law Project) mirrors substantial portions of PACER content at no charge and is the right starting point for most verifications.
State courts: 50 systems, uneven coverage
Unlike federal court, state court verification is jurisdiction-specific. The leading state portals:
- California: Each superior court runs its own portal; statewide consolidation is incomplete. CCMS deployment varies by county.
- Texas: re:SearchTX provides statewide access to court filings.
- New York: NYSCEF for civil filings; criminal records are county-level.
- Florida: MyFlCourtAccess and county clerk portals.
- Illinois: Cook County and statewide portals.
For multi-state verification, background-check vendors (see our vendor comparison) aggregate state and county searches into a single product. The aggregators do not improve on the underlying coverage; if a county does not publish records electronically, the aggregator falls back to a courthouse runner.
A candidate-supplied PDF of a court order is not evidence. The docket entry on PACER or the state portal is.
When forensic AI does the heavy lifting
Three common scenarios where forensic AI is the only check available:
- Claimed dismissal or expungement. A candidate supplies a PDF dismissal order to explain a prior arrest. PACER or state-portal confirmation is the right check; if the docket does not show the dismissal, the PDF is fabricated. Forensic AI corroborates while the registry confirmation is in flight.
- Old or sealed records. Records from before electronic docketing (pre-1995 for most federal courts) or sealed records require a courthouse visit. The candidate may supply a certified PDF; forensic AI catches obvious forgeries.
- International court orders. Foreign court records have no US equivalent of PACER. The candidate supplies the document with apostille or consular legalization (see our legalization guide). Forensic AI is the document-level check.
The signal set: PDF producer (CM/ECF stamp metadata is distinctive), ELA on case-caption and judge fields, font kerning on names and amounts, template-pattern match against the court's actual filing layout.
How background-check vendors handle court records
Major US background-check vendors (Checkr, HireRight, Sterling, Accurate) aggregate federal, state, and county court searches into a single product called a criminal record check. The aggregation is operationally important but does not change the underlying authority hierarchy:
- Federal criminal records pull from PACER (or vendor-cached PACER data).
- State criminal records pull from state administrative office of the courts databases, or in states without consolidated systems, from county clerk searches.
- Sex offender registries pull from the federal NSOPW (Dru Sjodin) and state registries.
- Civil records (lawsuits, judgments, evictions) follow a separate, often more limited, coverage pattern.
The output is a structured report keyed to the candidate's identity (verified through SSN trace, address history, AKA names) and the relevant jurisdictions. FCRA governs how the report can be used and disputed. See the broader vendor comparison.
Frequently asked questions
Is PACER free?
Per-page access is paid (USD 0.10 per page, capped at USD 3.00 per document). Quarterly bills under USD 30 are waived. CourtListener (Free Law Project) mirrors PACER content at no charge for many cases. For occasional use, costs are trivial; for high volume, vendor caching is more efficient.
How do I verify a foreign court order?
There is no equivalent of PACER abroad. The standard path is apostille or consular legalization of the order (see our cross-border legalization guide), plus forensic AI on the document for authenticity. For high-stakes use (US immigration, US litigation, US benefits), pair both.
What about court records that are sealed?
Sealed records do not appear on public dockets. A docket entry may show that the case exists and is sealed; the underlying documents are restricted. Background-check vendors disclose sealed records only when permitted by law and FCRA reportability rules.
Are arbitration awards public?
Generally no. AAA and JAMS docket information is private to the parties. Securities arbitration awards (FINRA) are published on FINRA's award database. Other arbitration awards are public only if the parties or a court make them so.
What is the most common court-record fraud in 2026?
Fabricated dismissal or expungement orders to conceal prior criminal records. The signal is mismatch between the supplied PDF and the actual docket on PACER or the state portal. Forensic AI corroborates; the docket query decides.