State judges wield enormous power with little oversight.
We make their decisions transparent and impact known.
Coming soon from Scrutinize
New York’s Highest Court,Decoded
What the U.S. Supreme Court is to the country, the Court of Appeals is to twenty million New Yorkers.
Yet no one has ever tracked how its seven judges vote on housing rights, police searches, or free speech.
We built the record.
Be the first to explore it
Why State Courts Matter
State courts shape our lives, but their decisions remain inaccessible. We reveal their records to strengthen democracy.
Judicial Profiles
Learn about every state judge in New York. Our profiles make it easy to explore judges’ backgrounds, decisions, and key metrics—so you can understand their records and see who’s up for reappointment or re-election in 2026.
Turning Complex Decisions into Clear Insights
We use data analysis, AI, and rigorous legal research to transform complex judicial data into clear insights, empowering informed public action.
Latest Report
The State of NY Courts: 2025 in Review
This factsheet steps back from individual judges to show what the numbers look like statewide: how the metrics we track changed from 2024 to 2025, and where the trends are heading.
From Transparency to Reform
Through FOILs and support for legislative reform, we expand court transparency and strengthen the legal system.
Featured FOIL: OCA Part 36 Fiduciary Appointments & Compensation
We seek machine-readable exports of the databases underlying OCA's Part 36 "appointments" and "compensation" public search tools, plus digital copies of all fiduciary appointment and compensation approval forms from 2010 to present.
Engaging the Public, Informing Policy
We spark public dialogue that shapes policy and promotes accountable, transparent state courts.
Featured Coverage
The Way the Mayor Picks NYC’s Judges Is Utterly Opaque. These Ideas Could Help
In the Courts of Contempt series of articles, Hell Gate and Type Investigations highlighted Scrutinize’s research on how judges’ professional backgrounds shape pretrial detention decisions and our recommendations for a more transparent, independent, and merit-based judicial appointment process.