New Yorkers headed to the voting booth typically have an easy time finding information about candidates running for president, Congress and the state Legislature. But judge candidates — those names at the bottom of most ballots — are normally much harder to research.

A new tool could change that.

Scrutinize, an organization that advocates for judicial transparency and criminal justice reform, has created a database with profiles of more than 20 judges up for reelection or reappointment this year, shared first with Gothamist. The profiles draw from a handful of data reports the group has published in recent months.

The stakes of judicial elections and appointments are high. Judges hold immense power to set bail, sentence people to years in prison, determine whether parents should have custody of their children and decide whether an employer has discriminated against a worker, just to name a few.

Using the lookup tool, voters can see if judicial candidates who are already on the bench keep criminal defendants in jail while they await trial more often than the average New York City judge. Users can review whether higher courts have reversed any of the judges’ cases and assigned them to other judges, or have shortened a judge-ordered sentence because it was too long. Users can also see how often judges have published their decisions online, and read what they wrote.

“If you don’t know what the people in power are deciding and how they’re deciding it, you can’t really hold them accountable or demand change in any ways,” said Oded Oren, founder and executive director of Scrutinize.

Oren, a former public defender, said his goal is to strengthen democracy in New York by gathering and sharing as much data as he can about a branch of government that’s often less transparent than the others.

For now, the database only includes profiles for 21 state judges in New York City who are either up for reelection or whose appointed terms expire this year. Oren said Scrutinize plans to expand the website to eventually include every judge across the state. He said he’s seen an increased appetite from the public to learn more about judges in recent years, especially in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade and a contentious battle over the appointment of the chief judge for New York’s Court of Appeals, the state’s highest court.

Republicans for years have worked to fill the federal bench with conservative judges. Now liberals in New York are campaigning more aggressively to get progressive judges in state courts.

“People have begun to understand that their judges are also human beings with ideology and politics that really shape the way that they apply the law and interpret the law,” Oren said.

The state Office of Court Administration did not respond to questions about whether it has plans to build out its own database with information on judges’ records. The Association of Justices of the Supreme Court of the State of New York declined to comment.

‘We don’t know what happens there’

In New York, some judges are elected, while others are appointed by the governor or local leaders, including mayors. New York City residents elect judicial delegates to nominate candidates for ballot races.

Dana Rachlin, chair of the Brooklyn Democratic Party’s judiciary committee, said she’s trying to bring a more thorough approach to judicial candidate endorsements. She said she feels a responsibility to deeply assess each candidate, because she knows firsthand the authority that judges can wield.

As executive director of We Build the Block, a community safety nonprofit in Brooklyn, Rachlin works closely with people involved in the criminal justice system. She said she’s seen time and again how judges can change the course of those people’s lives.

“I just think that that is the key, is to have the black-and-white, undisputable data that connects what’s happening hyper locally in courtrooms to larger, pervasive injustice,” she said. “Then, hopefully the general public gets more involved, but also the folks that vote get more involved. And there’s more scrutiny on party leadership to make the process more fair, more transparent.”