This is a standout piece authored by media-law specialists Steve Zansberg and Michael Beylkin.
The American Bar Association generously granted me permission to share it; it originally appeared in Communications Lawyer. It tackles a question I frequently encounter, including in responses to some of my posts about the law of pseudonymity and sealing:
Why, after all, should the filings in all civil cases—including those in which now-irreconcilably-separated private parties seek a judge to divide their assets, craft joint parenting plans, and so on—be readily accessible to nosey reporters or neighbors, and, worse yet, have those sordid private facts posted online, worldwide, in perpetuity?
It covers this in depth, but here are a few highlighted passages; consult the full piece for more:
At the forefront of the justifications for openness in the operations of the judiciary, and the records that form the basis for its resolution of disputes, is the aim to “keep all of the players honest,” to enable the public to understand and respect both the process and the outcomes, and to hold the decision-makers (judge and jury) accountable for their rulings. Transparency guards against unfairness and inequity in the application of the law, since “the sure knowledge that anyone” may monitor court operations “gives assurance that established procedures are being followed and that deviations will become known.
But what makes all judicial records, both criminal and civil, presumptively open to public inspection? Why should the public be allowed to review court filings in routine, mundane cases such as probate, trusts and estates, employment, and domestic relations?
The simplest, shortest answer is “because, your Honor, this court, all of its personnel, all materials you consider, or are asked to consider, and the decisions you render, are paid for by We the People, and this court exercises its authority in our name, on our behalf, as our public servants.”
One helpful summary of the reasons why there is a strong presumption of public access to “judicial records” in all cases (civil and criminal) appears in Public Access to Court Records: Guidelines for Development by State Courts, which the Conference of State Court Administrators adopted in August 2002:
The role of the judiciary is to resolve disputes, between private parties or between an individual or entity and the government, according to a set of rules…. [H]aving the process and result open to the public serves a societal interest in having a set of stable, predictable rules governing behavior and conduct. [Openness] furthers the goal of providing public education about the results in cases and the evidence supporting them…. [Indeed, t]he decision of the court stating what the rights and obligations of the parties is as important to the public as to the litigants….
©2026. Published in Communications Lawyer, Vol. 41, No. 1, Winter 2026, by the American Bar Association. Reproduced with permission. All rights reserved. This information or any portion thereof may not be copied or disseminated in any form or by any means or stored in an electronic database or retrieval system without the express written consent of the American Bar Association or the copyright holder.
