Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Fact check: Can sealed court records be accessed through FOIA requests?
Executive Summary
Sealed court records are generally not accessible to the public, and that restriction typically blocks their disclosure through FOIA requests; courts seal records by order and FOIA exemptions provide federal agencies lawful grounds to withhold records that mirror or incorporate sealed judicial material. Access may still be possible in narrow circumstances—for example where records are unsealed, the agency independently possesses non-sealed versions, or a court orders disclosure—but the baseline rule is that sealed filings are protected from ordinary FOIA release [1] [2].
1. Why judges can shut the public out — the mechanics of sealing that matter for FOIA fights
Judges enter sealing orders that remove documents from the public docket and physically or electronically restrict access; those orders create a judicial source of confidentiality that FOIA neither overrides nor routinely pierces. A sealing order changes the status of a filing from public to restricted, and federal courts and practice guides explain that sealed records are not ordinarily available through public access channels like PACER, which limits the ability of agencies to release such documents in response to FOIA requests [1]. This judicial control matters because FOIA applies to federal agencies, not to courts, so agencies faced with sealed material must evaluate whether disclosure would conflict with court orders or fall under FOIA exemptions [2].
2. FOIA exemptions do most of the legal heavy lifting against disclosure
FOIA contains several exemptions that routinely justify withholding information that mirrors sealed court material—most notably exemptions for personal privacy, law enforcement records, and information properly subject to another statute or court order. Agencies rely on these statutory exemptions to deny FOIA requests seeking sealed or sensitive court-related records, and recent FOIA overviews and agency exemption pages show that law enforcement and privacy grounds are frequently invoked in practice [3] [4]. Case law cited in FOIA updates reinforces that courts will often uphold agency withholdings when disclosure would harm privacy, investigations, or conflict with secrecy ordered by a court [3].
3. State practice adds complexity — filing under seal varies and affects public access
State rules and practice notes, such as those for Florida circuit courts, describe procedural paths for filing under seal and obtaining sealing orders; those local practices determine whether documents are ever public and influence whether a state agency could disclose related material under state FOI laws. The practical law guidance highlights that sealing procedures differ by jurisdiction and that pandemic-era changes have left some administrative variations in place, so analysts and requesters must check local orders and rules before assuming a FOIA request can reach sealed records [5]. This variability means a federal FOIA request might still encounter sealed records produced by state courts that are protected under state sealing practices.
4. What happens when an agency possesses court materials independently
If a federal agency separately possesses a record that was filed under seal in court, the posture changes: the agency must still evaluate FOIA exemptions and court orders, but possession alone does not mandate non-disclosure. Agency FOIA guidance and overviews suggest agencies examine whether release would violate court orders or statutory exemptions; declassification or court-ordered unsealing can permit disclosure, whereas ongoing secrecy or privacy interests can justify continued withholding [2] [4]. In short, independent agency possession is a necessary but not sufficient condition for release—the legal status and exemptions remain decisive.
5. When judicial orders and FOIA clash — rare routes to pry open sealed files
There are narrow pathways where sealed records become accessible: a court can unseal records on motion, a judge can limit the scope of sealing retroactively, or a higher court can order release; FOIA litigation sometimes proceeds in parallel but typically does not trump a contemporaneous sealing order without a court ruling. The journalist and practice guides note that strategic litigation, motions to unseal, or public-interest arguments can change the status quo, but these are procedural battles requiring judicial relief rather than purely FOIA-driven remedies [1] [5].
6. Multiple viewpoints and institutional agendas shape how sealing is discussed
Judicial-access advocates emphasize transparency and public monitoring of courts, arguing that sealing should be narrow; conversely, privacy and law enforcement stakeholders highlight safety, privacy, and investigatory integrity as reasons to seal. The sources reflect both perspectives: journalist guides stress public access to PACER and open courts, while FOIA exemption summaries and agency pages emphasize legitimate reasons to withhold. Recognize that each source may carry institutional preferences—news and journalist guides favor openness, agency materials prioritize statutory compliance—so assessing both legal rules and practical incentives is essential [1] [4] [6].
7. Bottom line for requesters — practical steps and realistic expectations
Requesters should first confirm whether a sealing order exists and whether the record has been independently unsealed; if the record remains sealed, expect a FOIA denial grounded in exemptions or court-order conflict and plan to pursue judicial relief or motions to unseal rather than rely on FOIA alone. The practice notes and FOIA overviews suggest combining docket research, targeted FOIA requests, and, when warranted, motions in court or FOIA litigation that addresses the interplay of judicial secrecy and statutory exemptions [5] [3] [2].