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.
Which federal laws and statutes govern access to and sealing of federal criminal records?
Executive summary
Federal law contains no single, comprehensive statute that broadly authorizes routine expungement or sealing of adult federal criminal records; federal courts have limited inherent authority to seal records and Congress has passed targeted federal measures (for example, the Fair Chance Act changes to Titles 2, 5 and 28) that affect when sealed or expunged records may be considered in hiring for the federal government and contractors [1] [2]. Most sealing/expungement pathways operate at the state level, and federal record relief remains narrow and fact-specific, with courts treating federal expungement as rare and reserved for limited circumstances [3] [4].
1. The legal gap: no general federal expungement statute
Unlike many state systems that now provide detailed sealing or expungement rules, the federal government lacks a general statutory regime allowing broad expungement or automatic sealing of adult federal convictions. Multiple commentators and organizations state there is no standard federal statute for sealing and expungement of federal criminal records, leaving federal record relief limited and exceptional [1] [4]. This absence explains why advocates and groups urge Congress to adopt federal “clean slate” or sealing legislation [5].
2. What authority exists in federal courts: “inherent” but narrow
Federal judges have been recognized as having some inherent power to seal or expunge records in particular circumstances, but courts apply a high bar. Practical guides and case law cited by defense attorneys note that federal expungement is extremely rare and usually reserved for exceptional circumstances (for example, unlawful mass arrests, prosecutions intended to harass civil-rights workers, or where the underlying statute has been declared unconstitutional) [3]. The limited use of judicial authority contrasts with broader state remedies and contributes to the perception that a federal conviction can be effectively permanent absent narrow statutory tools [3] [6].
3. Targeted federal statutes and reforms that affect record access
Although there is no broad federal expungement law, Congress has enacted targeted provisions that affect use and disclosure of criminal history. The Fair Chance Act, enacted as part of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2020, amended Titles 2, 5 and 28 to prohibit many pre‑offer inquiries about arrests and convictions for federal employers and certain federal contractors, and it explicitly extends protection to records “sealed or expunged pursuant to law,” as well as some juvenile records [2]. This is a statutory limitation on certain uses of records, not a new mechanism to seal or expunge federal records themselves [2].
4. Federal administrative and program-specific exceptions
Available sources show that statutes and administrative rules in specific contexts can preserve access to sealed records or require retention for program integrity (for example, federal health‑care program integrity exceptions and other statutory disclosure duties). State statutes and guidance also commonly reserve the right to share sealed records with federal agencies for administration of federal or state duties, illustrating how sealing does not always eliminate government access [7] [8]. In short, sealing may limit public access but often preserves law‑enforcement or agency access for statutory purposes [9] [8].
5. State law dominates practical relief; federal records remain distinct
Practitioners and comparative resources emphasize that most record‑clearing tools operate under state law and that state sealing or expungement orders generally do not reach federal records; state sealing rules “have no effect” on federal arrests and convictions [10] [11]. This is why people with federal convictions face a different, often harder, path to relief than those with state convictions, and why reformers push for federal legislative action to create clearer pathways [5] [4].
6. Ongoing policy debates and proposals
Task‑force reports and advocacy briefs call for Congress to create an enforceable, retroactive federal mechanism to seal certain nonviolent federal convictions and to fund state “clean slate” efforts; these recommendations reflect bipartisan momentum at the state level but recognize the current absence of a federal counterpart [5] [1]. At the same time, commentators note tradeoffs—automatic sealing simplifies relief but must preserve access for courts, law enforcement, and statutory programs [5] [9].
Limitations and next steps: The sources provided outline the landscape but do not catalogue every federal statute that affects limited categories of records (for example, juvenile‑specific federal provisions or the narrow Federal First Offender mechanisms referenced in practice guides). For a case‑specific question (eligibility, procedures, or whether a particular federal statute applies), consult a practitioner or the specific federal court rules because "available sources do not mention" detailed procedural steps for individual filings in this dataset [3] [1].