Public Court Records, Protective Orders, and Required Redaction
U.S. courts are traditionally open, but online records ended practical obscurity. Litigants use protective orders (FRCP 26(c), three-part test) and HIPAA qualified protective orders. FRCP 5.2 (2007) requires attorneys to redact SSNs, financial accounts, birth years, and minors' names from filings.
The United States has a strong tradition of public access to records (federal FOIA, state open-records laws) and open courtrooms. Putting court records online ended Practical obscurity - the difficulty and expense that had effectively shielded paper records - raising identity-fraud risk (as when bankruptcy courts proposed posting SSNs and account numbers in 2000).
A Protective order (FRCP 26(c)) lets a judge decide what stays confidential and how (e.g. "attorney's eyes only"). The moving party must show good cause; courts apply a three-part test: (1) the resisting party shows the information is confidential, (2) the requesting party shows it is relevant and necessary, (3) the court weighs the harm of disclosure against the need. HIPAA's Qualified protective order (QPO) applies in state courts and bars non-litigation use plus requires return or destruction of PHI.
| Data element | What may remain |
|---|---|
| Social Security / taxpayer ID number | Last four digits only |
| Date of birth | Year of birth only |
| Minor's name | Initials only |
| Financial account number | Last four digits only |
Federal Criminal Rule 49.1 and Bankruptcy Rule 9037 mirror Rule 5.2. In criminal proceedings a fifth category applies: only the city and state of a home address may appear, not the precise address.