The subject of the draft and its ostensible subject are different, which should be fixed. "Open justice" and analysis of "big judicial data" have nothing to do with each other. As you point out, a system of "open justice" exists in the US, where judicial opinions are (almost entirely) published, statistics on the behavior of courts are compiled and published in the state and federal systems, and detailed budget information is publicly accessible. This does result in findings of judicial bias in all sorts of respects, which the public largely ignores and even the professionals take for granted.

Maybe the fear of big data analytics is a primary source of opposition to open justice. You so assert, without any proof. Because the two things have nothing to do with each other, I'm a little doubtful.

So far as the corrosive effect of more comprehensive data analysis of the behavior of courts is concerned, the direct "effect on my job" motivation you postulate seems unlikely. For federal judges appointed for life and state judges elected to long (in NY, 14-year) terms, this is not credible. Nor is it credible that more detailed analysis would be necessary to show which judges are inefficient: the basic statistics are constantly available and are monitored closely by the judges who supervise the judiciary. Everyone, including the kid lawyers in every courthouse, know who the efficient and inefficient judges are.

So the area of the draft that is the real subject is the extent to which data reporting on judicial systems will affect the public's level of trust in the justice system. You appear to be speculating that there are biases that can only be found through such large-data crunching that are not apparent on their face from what the public (both the professional public and the masses) already know or suspect. Why should we expect big data to prove to us more effectively than we all know already the effects of social stratification and marginalization on justice-system outcomes? Better answers on these points will make the next draft much stronger.