The Court Records We're Not Allowed to See

15 Oct 2026 · 33 min · Episode 208

Episode The Court Records We're Not Allowed to See

0:00 33:18

A sweeping Stanford Law study reveals how routinely federal courts seal records, sometimes concealing information with profound implications for public health and safety.

----

Evidence of dangerous drugs, defective products, and corporate misconduct is often hidden from public view through sealed court records. And federal judges are granting requests to seal records at an astonishing rate, often without applying the proper legal standard, according to the largest-ever study of the issue.

Stanford Law professors Nora Freeman Engstrom, JD ’02, and David Freeman Engstrom, JD ’02, co-directors of the Deborah L. Rhode Center on the Legal Profession, join Pam Karlan to discuss their findings. Their research reveals that roughly 90 percent of sealing requests are granted, about three-quarters go unopposed, and judges frequently fail to cite any legal standard at all.

Why is secrecy so pervasive in a justice system built on public access? The Engstroms explain how the incentives of litigants, lawyers, and judges can leave no one looking out for the public's right to know. They also discuss their push for a new federal sealing rule and why, with civil trials increasingly rare, access to court records is more important than ever.

Links:

• Nora Freeman Engstrom >>> Stanford Law School page • David Freeman Engstrom >>> Stanford Law School page • “[Sealed Document]: An Empirical Study of Sealing Orders in the Federal Courts” >>> Stanford Law School page • “Millions Face Court Alone. California Can Change That.” >>> Stanford Law School page

Connect:

• Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast Website • Stanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn Page • Rich Ford >>> Twitter/X • Pam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School Page • Diego Zambrano >>> Stanford Law School Page • Stanford Law School >>> Twitter/X • Stanford Lawyer Magazine >>> Twitter/X

(00:00:00) Introduction

(00:02:08) What does it mean to seal a document?

(00:04:06) What should be sealed, and sealing vs. redaction

(00:05:55) Catch-22 and Judge Breyer’s redacted opinion

(00:06:54) How the study was done: Two million dockets and a machine learning pipeline

(00:08:20) The wrong standard (or no standard at all)

(00:10:43) Real-world consequences: Sealing and hidden public health hazards

(00:12:26) “Shadow consent”: Why sealing motions go unopposed

(00:14:49) No constituency for transparency

(00:16:06) Can the press be the fail-safe? (It’s a myth)

(00:19:35) Proposed fixes: Intervention tools and a Rhode Center staff attorney

(00:20:34) Law on the books vs. law in action: A rule of law problem

(00:22:53) Why litigation transparency matters: Regulatory, procedural, and democratic work

(00:25:55) The vanishing trial and why the papers matter

(00:27:47) Cause for optimism? Prospects for rulemaking

(00:29:12) Where to draw the line: Protective orders vs. sealing standards

(00:30:26) Rules vs. standards: What should always be sealed?

(00:32:05) Closing thoughts and where to find the article

Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Links in the notes 12

The episode on the publisher’s site (opens in a new tab)

Shows are listed from Apple Podcasts' charts and directory, and Podcast Index where it is used. Every show and episode belongs to its publisher and plays from the publisher's own feed; this site hosts none of them. Explicit shows are for adult profiles only, and children’s profiles hear only children’s shows. More about this list.