[testing12341234]

Maybe it would be helpful to modify "entitled free of charge on PACER" to a phrasing that includes information about how the charges are unreasonable.

I happen to know that under the law, PACER access is not required to be "free of charge", and thus the rest of the statement falls flat. Even though I agree that PACER pricing is out of touch with the law due it's pricing being well above the costs required to maintain the system.

While I'm not sure of your target audience with your statement, it's clear that on some level federal employees of the court system are included. They may also know "free of charge" is not what the law says, and thus it may also undermine your argument with them as well.

[thinkcomp]

There is already a link in the statement to this letter, which is quite detailed:

http://www.thinkcomputer.org/20120209.pacer.pdf

Furthermore, many at the courts have read this blog post:

http://www.aarongreenspan.com/writing/essay.html?id=84

They are well aware of what is going on.