> A similar dilemma faces PACER. Overwhelmingly, PACER is used by attorneys, who are generally well-compensated professionals with a whole host of protectionist policies insulating them from market forces.

One of those protectionist policies is charging for PACER itself.

The costs of running PACER are absolutely trivial in comparison to the costs of running the judiciary. To the point that even bringing the point up is disingenuous to the point that it discredits everything else you say.

Case law is law. People are required to obey the law. They should be able to access the law so they can know how to follow it. It's that simple.