Record sealing

'''Record sealing''' is the process of making public records inaccessible to the public.

In many cases, a person with a sealed record gains the legal right to deny or not acknowledge anything to do with the arrest and the legal proceedings from the case itself.

Records are commonly sealed in a number of situations: *Sealed birth records (typically after adoption or determination of paternity) *Juvenile criminal records may be sealed *Other types of cases involving juveniles may be sealed, anonymized, or pseudonymized ("impounded"); e.g., child sex offense or custody cases *Cases using witness protection information may be partly sealed *Cases involving trade secrets *Cases involving state secrets

==Filing under seal in US court== {{Further|Under seal (law)}} Normally, records should not be filed under seal without a court permission.<ref name="calif">{{cite web|url=http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/cms/rules/index.cfm?title=two&linkid=rule2_551|title=2011 California Rules of Court|date=2 December 2021}}</ref> However, FRCP 5.2 requires that sensitive text – like Social Security number, Taxpayer Identification Number, birthday, bank accounts, and children’s names – should be redacted off the filings made with the court and accompanying exhibits.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/Rule5_2.htm|title=FRCP Rule 5.2. Privacy Protection For Filings Made with the Court}}</ref> A person making a redacted filing can file an unredacted copy under seal, or the Court can choose to order later that an additional filing be made under seal without redaction. Alternately, the filing party may ask the court’s permission to file some exhibits completely under seal.

When the document is filed "under seal", it should have a clear indication for the court clerk to file it separately – most often by stamping words "Filed Under Seal" on the bottom of each page. Person making filing should also provide instructions to the court clerk that the document needs to be filed "under seal". Courts often have specific requirements to these filings in their Local Rules.

== Difference from expungement == Expungement, which is a physical destruction, namely a complete erasure of one's criminal records, and therefore usually carries a higher standard, differs from record sealing, which is only to restrict the public's access to records, so that only certain law enforcement agencies or courts, under special circumstances, will have access to them. A record seal will greatly improve the chance of employment, as employers will not have access to damning records. There are occasions, like expungement, where one can truthfully state under oath that they have never been convicted before.

Most of the time, a record seal has more relaxed requirements than an expungement. If an expungement is not allowed with a case, then sealing a record may be the best bet. Different states have different terms for what constitutes sealing of a record.

== Cybersecurity incidents involving sealed records ==

Several cybersecurity incidents have demonstrated that sealed court documents are not always secure in practice, with vulnerabilities and data breaches exposing sensitive information.

In January 2021, following the SolarWinds cyber attack, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court United States District Court for the District of Nevada announced that its Case Management/Electronic Case Files CM/ECF system had been potentially compromised.<ref>{{cite web |title=Notice to ECF Users Regarding the SolarWinds Cybersecurity Breach U.S. Bankruptcy Court, District of Nevada |website=U.S. Bankruptcy Court, District of Nevada |date=January 12, 2021 |url=https://www.nvb.uscourts.gov/news-rss/announcements/2021/0112-solarwinds-breach/}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=BANKRUPTCY BUGLE — District of Nevada — JANUARY 2021 |url=https://www.nvb.uscourts.gov/downloads/bugle-newsletters/2021/2021_01.pdf |website=United States Bankruptcy Court, District of Nevada |date=January 2021 |access-date=September 12, 2025}}</ref> The judiciary stated that additional safeguards were being implemented to protect filings,<ref>{{cite web |title=Judiciary Addresses Cybersecurity Breach: Extra Safeguards to Protect Sensitive Court Records |url=https://www.uscourts.gov/data-news/judiciary-news/2021/01/06/judiciary-addresses-cybersecurity-breach-extra-safeguards-protect-sensitive-court-records |website=United States Courts |date=January 6, 2021 |access-date=September 12, 2025}}</ref> and that the review of the incident and its impact was ongoing. Reports noted that the breach raised concerns about exposure of highly sensitive and sealed documents submitted through the CM/ECF system.<ref>{{cite web |last=Krebs |first=Brian |title=Sealed U.S. Court Records Exposed in SolarWinds Breach |url=https://krebsonsecurity.com/2021/01/sealed-u-s-court-records-exposed-in-solarwinds-breach/ |website=Krebs on Security |date=January 7, 2021 |access-date=September 12, 2025}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last=Zorz |first=Zeljka |title=Sealed U.S. court records possibly accessed by SolarWinds attackers |url=https://www.helpnetsecurity.com/2021/01/08/sealed-court-records-accessed-solarwinds-attackers/ |website=Help Net Security |date=January 8, 2021 |access-date=September 12, 2025}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last=Volz |first=Dustin |author2=Robert McMillan |title=Federal Judiciary's Systems Likely Breached in SolarWinds Hack |url=https://www.wsj.com/politics/national-security/federal-judiciarys-systems-likely-breached-in-solarwinds-hack-11610040175 |work=The Wall Street Journal |date=January 7, 2021 |access-date=September 12, 2025}}</ref>

In 2023, security researcher Jason Parker, following a tip from an activist, identified flaws in online court systems that exposed sealed records including confidential testimony and medical records through publicly accessible portals.<ref>{{cite news |title=Software Flaws Exposed Sealed Court Docs, Researcher Says |work=Law360 |date=November 30, 2023 |url=https://www.law360.com/pulse/articles/1771766/software-flaws-exposed-sealed-court-docs-researcher-says}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last=Whittaker |first=Zack |title=Security flaws in court record systems used in five US states exposed sensitive legal documents |work=TechCrunch |date=November 30, 2023 |url=https://techcrunch.com/2023/11/30/us-court-records-systems-vulnerabilities-exposed-sealed-documents/ |access-date=September 12, 2025}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last=Baker-White |first=Emily |title=Massive Court Breach Exposed Confidential Court Testimony, Medical And Psychiatric Records |work=Forbes |date=June 18, 2024 |url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/emilybaker-white/2024/06/18/sealed-records-courts-breach/}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last=Kovacs |first=Eduard |title=Court Data Exposed by Vulnerabilities in Software Used by US Government: Researcher |url=https://www.securityweek.com/court-data-exposed-by-vulnerabilities-in-software-used-by-us-government-researcher/ |work=SecurityWeek |date=October 3, 2024 |access-date=September 12, 2025}}</ref>

In 2024, a cyber intrusion targeting attorneys in a civil case involving Representative Matt Gaetz led to the unauthorized access and leak of sealed depositions and related records. The breach exposed confidential testimony and financial records, some of which were later reported by news outlets, raising concerns about the security of electronically stored legal materials and the handling of sealed filings.<ref>{{cite news |title=Unknown person accessed documents on Matt Gaetz misconduct allegations |work=Reuters |date=November 19, 2024 |url=https://www.reuters.com/world/us/hacker-accessed-documents-matt-gaetz-misconduct-allegations-lawyer-says-2024-11-19}} </ref><ref>{{cite news |title=Leaked Records Show Matt Gaetz Sent $10,000 to Two Women Who Testified He Paid Them for Sex |work=Democracy Now |date=November 20, 2024 |url=https://www.democracynow.org/2024/11/20/headlines/leaked_records_show_matt_gaetz_sent_10_000_to_two_women_who_testified_he_paid_them_for_sex}} </ref><ref>{{cite news |last=Durkee |first=Alison |title=Matt Gaetz Controversy Explained: Sexual Misconduct Allegations Sink Trump's Attorney General Nominee |work=Forbes |date=November 21, 2024 |url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2024/11/21/matt-gaetz-withdraws-as-trumps-attorney-general-nominee-the-sexual-misconduct-allegations-against-him-explained}} </ref><ref>{{cite news |last=Ferris |first=Sarah |title=House Ethics Committee releases report on Rep. Matt Gaetz |url=https://www.cnn.com/2024/12/23/politics/matt-gaetz-house-ethics-report |work=CNN |date=December 23, 2024 |access-date=August 12, 2025}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last=Kaplan |first=Michael |title="Unknown and unauthorized third party" has gained access to Matt Gaetz depositions, source says" |url=https://www.cbsnews.com/news/matt-gaetz-depositions-leak-investigations/ |work=CBS News |date=November 19, 2024 |access-date=September 12, 2025}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last=Draper | first=Robert |title=Matt Gaetz Says He Was Hacked, Testifies Before the Ethics Committee |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/19/us/politics/matt-gaetz-hack-testimony.html |work=The New York Times |date=November 19, 2024 |access-date=September 12, 2025}}</ref><ref>{{cite report |title=IN THE MATTER OF ALLEGATIONS RELATING TO REPRESENTATIVE MATT GAETZ |date=December 23, 2024 |url=https://ethics.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Committee-Report.pdf}} </ref><ref>{{cite news |title=Hacker accesses sealed testimony of woman alleging Matt Gaetz had sex with her when she was 17 |work=NBC News |date=November 19, 2024 |url=https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/hacker-accesses-sealed-testimony-woman-alleging-matt-gaetz-sex-was-17-rcna180830 |access-date=September 12, 2025}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Amiri |first1=Farnoush |last2=Mascaro |first2=Lisa |title=House Ethics Committee accuses Gaetz of paying for sex, including with 17-year-old girl |work=AP News |date=December 23, 2024 |url=https://apnews.com/article/matt-gaetz-congress-ethics-report-538cb5387bf95925245bf87fa6b1adcb |access-date=September 12, 2025}}</ref> <ref>{{cite news |last=Steakin |first=Will |title=House Ethics Committee subpoenas documents from lawsuit brought by Gaetz's friend: Sources |url=https://abcnews.go.com/US/house-ethics-committee-subpoenas-documents-lawsuit-brought-gaetzs/story?id=114387365 |work=ABC News |date=October 15, 2024 |access-date=September 12, 2025 }}</ref>

In 2025, multiple reports confirmed that the federal judiciary's CM/ECF and PACER (law) filing system was compromised, exposing sealed indictments, confidential informant information, and other sensitive filings.<ref>{{cite magazine |title=Security News This Week: The US Court Records System Has Been Hacked |magazine=Wired |date=Aug 9, 2025 |url=https://www.wired.com/story/us-court-records-system-hacked/}}</ref> Some courts temporarily reverted to paper-based filing to mitigate the risks of further disclosure.<ref>{{cite news |title=Federal courts go old school to paper filings after hack to key system |work=CNN |date=August 2025 |url=https://www.cnn.com/2025/08/14/politics/federal-courts-go-to-old-school-paper-filings-after-hack-to-key-system}}</ref> The FBI later confirmed that the breach had exposed sealed records, and investigators suspected foreign state actors were involved.<ref>{{cite news |title=Hack of US Court System Exposed Sealed Records, FBI Says |work=Politico |date=August 2025 |url=https://www.politico.com/news/2025/08/06/federal-court-filing-system-pacer-hack-00496916}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title=Russia Is Suspected to Be Behind Breach of Federal Court Filing System |work=The New York Times |date=12 August 2025 |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/12/us/politics/russia-hack-federal-court-system.html}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Cybersecurity measures strengthened in light of attacks on Judiciary's case management system |url=https://www.uscourts.gov/data-news/judiciary-news/2025/08/07/cybersecurity-measures-strengthened-light-attacks-judiciarys-case-management-system |website=United States Courts |date=August 7, 2025 |access-date=September 12, 2025}}</ref>

== GAO publications referencing sealed records ==

* ''Closed Criminal Plea and Sentencing Proceedings'' (1983) – Reviewed Department of Justice policies on closing plea and sentencing hearings. GAO noted that sealed transcripts should be unsealed once the reasons for closure no longer applied.<ref name="GAO1983">{{cite report |title=Closed Criminal Plea and Sentencing Proceedings |publisher=Government Accountability Office |date=April 21, 1983 |id=GGD-83-56 |url=https://www.gao.gov/assets/ggd-83-56.pdf}}</ref>

* ''Information on Plea Agreements and Settlements in Defense Procurement Fraud Cases'' (1992) – Examined outcomes of procurement fraud prosecutions. GAO observed that in some instances the results were sealed from public access.<ref name="GAO1992">{{cite report |title=Information on Plea Agreements and Settlements in Defense Procurement Fraud Cases |publisher=Government Accountability Office |date=1992 |id=GGD-92-135FS |url=https://www.gao.gov/products/ggd-92-135fs}}</ref>

* ''Military Recruiting: More Needs to Be Done to Better Screen Applicants and Detect Fraud'' (1999) – Investigated fraudulent enlistments in the armed forces. The report highlighted that sealed juvenile records often prevented recruiters from discovering prior offenses.<ref name="GAO1999">{{cite report |title=Military Recruiting: More Needs to Be Done to Better Screen Applicants and Detect Fraud |publisher=Government Accountability Office |date=February 23, 1999 |id=NSIAD-99-53 |url=https://www.gao.gov/assets/nsiad-99-53.pdf}}</ref>

* ''Social Security Numbers: Governments Could Do More to Reduce Display in Public Records'' (2004) – Analyzed risks associated with SSN availability in state and local records. GAO pointed out that some categories of records, such as adoption proceedings, were sealed and less likely to expose identifiers.<ref name="GAO2004">{{cite report |title=Social Security Numbers: Governments Could Do More to Reduce Display in Public Records |publisher=Government Accountability Office |date=November 9, 2004 |id=GAO-05-59 |url=https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-05-59.pdf}}</ref>

* ''Social Security Numbers: Stronger Safeguards Needed to Protect Privacy'' (2005 testimony) – Testimony before Congress reiterating concerns over SSN exposure in public records, while noting that sealed categories (e.g., adoption) were exceptions.<ref name="GAO2005">{{citation |title=Social Security Numbers: Stronger Safeguards Needed to Protect Privacy |publisher=Government Accountability Office |date=September 15, 2005 |id=GAO-05-1016T |url=https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-05-1016t.pdf}}</ref>

* ''U.S. Supreme Court: Policies and Perspectives on Video and Audio Coverage of Appellate Court Proceedings'' (2016) – Surveyed appellate court policies on courtroom media coverage. The report acknowledged distinctions between public filings, confidential submissions, and sealed materials.<ref name="GAO2016">{{cite report |title=U.S. Supreme Court: Policies and Perspectives on Video and Audio Coverage of Appellate Court Proceedings |publisher=Government Accountability Office |date=April 28, 2016 |id=GAO-16-437 |url=https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-16-437.pdf}}</ref>

* ''Evictions: National Data Are Limited and Challenging to Collect'' (2024) – Examined nationwide eviction data. GAO reported that in some states eviction records may be sealed or expunged, limiting researchers' ability to compile datasets.<ref name="GAO2024Evictions">{{cite report |title=Evictions: National Data Are Limited and Challenging to Collect |publisher=Government Accountability Office |date=February 28, 2024 |id=GAO-24-106637|url=https://www.gao.gov/assets/870/866659.pdf}}</ref>

* ''DOD Fraud Risk Management: Enhanced Data and Collaboration Could Improve Efforts'' (2024) – Reviewed Department of Defense fraud-risk management. GAO noted that some adjudicative records in its dataset were sealed, restricting completeness of oversight data.<ref name="GAO2024DOD">{{cite report |title=DOD Fraud Risk Management: Enhanced Data and Collaboration Could Improve Efforts |publisher=Government Accountability Office |date=February 27, 2024 |id=GAO-24-105358 |url=https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-24-105358.pdf}}</ref>

==References== {{Reflist}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Record Sealing}} Category:Information sensitivity Category:Information privacy Category:Legal terminology Category:Data breaches Category:Data security Category:Judicial legal terminology Category:Legal procedure Category:Privacy law Category:Criminal procedure Category:Government databases Category:Evidence law Category:Public records Category:Common law legal terminology Category:Computer security Category:Secrecy Category:Records management Category:Law enforcement in the United States Category:Judicial remedies Category:Court orders Category:Freedom of information Category:Legal documents Category:Cybercrime Category:Record sealing