Q: What are some of the reasons certain filings with the Supreme Court are sealed? How is this determined?
A: As the Reporters Committee for the Freedom of the Press noted in a blog post, filings can be sealed for a variety of reasons – for example, to protect people who are in the witness protection program, to redact the names of government informants or young people who are convicted of crimes, or for national security reasons – for example, in cases involving Guantanamo Bay detainees.
At the Supreme Court, the sealing of filings is governed by the court’s rules. A litigant who wants to file a document under seal must file a motion seeking permission to do so. That motion, the court’s rules provide, must “address whether the material in question was sealed in a lower court.” If it was, then the motion should indicate whether the material is still sealed and why it should remain sealed to maintain confidentiality. If the material was not sealed, then the litigant seeking to file it under seal should explain why the Supreme Court should keep it under wraps. Regarding the process itself: “Neither the motion to file a document under seal nor any document containing sealed material should be submitted through the Court’s electronic filing system,” the court’s rules specify.
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in January 2023 in a case in which the petition for review was filed under seal: In re Grand Jury, a challenge by an unnamed law firm that received a grand jury subpoena for its communications with a client. The challenger also filed a public version of its petition that (among other things) has the name of the firm redacted, as well as a supplemental sealed volume of the appendix to the petition for review.
A slightly different variation on sealed filings can be found in Social Security and immigration cases, in which federal rules limit online access to the filings in the case – including at the Supreme Court.
