When a court case is sealed, a judge has ordered the file closed to public view while leaving the record itself intact inside the court system. The case still exists. The court still remembers it. But ordinary people, journalists, and most background check companies can no longer pull up the details, because a judicial order sits between those details and the public. Sealing is the middle ground between full public access and the complete erasure that expungement provides.
Sealed Is Not the Same as Expunged
People use these words interchangeably, and they shouldn’t. Sealing hides a record while preserving it. Expungement destroys the record and treats the case as though it never happened.1Legal Information Institute. Sealing of Records
The gap between the two shows up fastest when there’s a repeat charge. If a first DUI conviction was sealed and a second one follows, a prosecutor can typically retrieve that sealed record and use it to seek enhanced penalties. With a true expungement, the original record is gone, though some government and law enforcement databases may still carry traces depending on how quickly they update.1Legal Information Institute. Sealing of Records
Sealing is also different from a confidentiality agreement between private parties. A confidentiality agreement is a contract. A sealing order is a judicial directive with the force of law, and violating it can lead to contempt of court.
Why Courts Don’t Seal Cases Lightly
American law starts from the position that court records belong to the public. The U.S. Supreme Court recognized a general right to inspect and copy judicial records in Nixon v. Warner Communications.2Legal Information Institute. Nixon v. Warner Communications, Inc. The First Amendment adds a second layer of protection, and under Press-Enterprise Co. v. Superior Court, that presumption of openness can be overcome only by an overriding interest, supported by specific findings that closure is essential, with the sealing order narrowly tailored to serve that interest.3Legal Information Institute. Press-Enterprise Co. v. Superior Court
In practice, the party asking for sealing carries a heavy burden. Calling something “confidential” or “sensitive” doesn’t clear it. The court has to independently review the material, explain on the record why sealing is justified, and limit the order to no more than necessary.4Knight First Amendment Institute. Judicial Secrecy: How to Fix the Over-sealing of Federal Court Records The situations that regularly meet that bar include juvenile cases, trade secrets, protection of victims in sexual assault or domestic violence cases, medical records, and ongoing criminal investigations where disclosure would tip off a suspect. Federal law goes so far as to require that responses to outside inquiries about a juvenile’s record be identical to responses about someone who was never involved in a delinquency case at all.5Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 U.S. Code 5038 – Use of Juvenile Records
Who Can Still See a Sealed Case
“Sealed” doesn’t mean invisible to everyone. Several categories of people and institutions keep access.
The parties to the case and their attorneys generally retain access to the documents, though in partial-sealing situations a party who didn’t previously have access to the sealed material may only receive redacted versions.6Judicial Branch of California. California Rules of Court – Rule 2.551 – Procedures for Filing Records Under Seal The court itself, including the judge and court staff, keeps full access for administrative purposes.
Law enforcement and government agencies sit in a middle zone. For juvenile records, federal law identifies specific situations where sealed material can be shared: inquiries from other courts, law enforcement investigating a crime, agencies preparing presentence reports, and agencies evaluating someone for a position affecting national security.5Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 U.S. Code 5038 – Use of Juvenile Records State laws follow similar patterns for adult sealed records, generally allowing access for law enforcement, firearms licensing agencies, and immigration authorities.
For everyone outside those categories, access requires going back to court and showing an overriding public interest or changed circumstances strong enough to break the seal.
What Sealing Means for Background Checks and Jobs
This is where sealing has the most daily impact. Background check companies generally cannot report sealed records to private-sector employers. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has taken the position that including a sealed or expunged conviction in a consumer report is misleading and inaccurate because there is no longer a public record of the matter.
The exceptions are real and worth knowing. Federal agencies conducting security clearance investigations can reach sealed records. Applicants for law enforcement positions or jobs involving vulnerable populations may face deeper checks that reach sealed material. The FBI’s national criminal database may also still carry records after a state court seals them, especially if the database hasn’t yet been updated. A sealed conviction is not the same as a nonexistent one when a federal background check is involved.
On most private employment applications, state law lets you answer “no” when asked about convictions that have been sealed. But when a government application explicitly asks about sealed records and warns that nondisclosure is itself an offense, honesty is the only safe path.
How a Case Gets Sealed
Sealing rarely happens automatically. A party has to file a motion to seal, laying out specific reasons the records deserve protection and addressing why those reasons overcome the public’s right of access. Vague claims about embarrassment don’t clear the bar. The motion has to show a compelling need and the absence of any less restrictive alternative.
The court usually holds a hearing. If the judge grants the motion, the order must include specific findings explaining why sealing is warranted, so that appellate courts can later review whether the seal was properly entered.3Legal Information Institute. Press-Enterprise Co. v. Superior Court
Judges often prefer a narrower option than sealing a whole file. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2 already requires redaction of personal identifiers like Social Security numbers, birth dates, minors’ names, and financial account numbers in any filing, sealed or not. A party who needs the full information on file can submit an unredacted copy under seal while the redacted version stays public.7Legal Information Institute. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 5.2 – Privacy Protection For Filings Made with the Court
A separate track exists in states that have passed “Clean Slate” laws, which automatically seal certain qualifying criminal records after a waiting period, provided the person has stayed crime-free. Violent crimes and sex offenses are universally excluded.
Can a Sealed Case Be Unsealed?
Sealing orders aren’t necessarily permanent. Any interested party, including the original litigants, journalists, or advocacy organizations, can file a motion to unseal.8The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. First Step in Unsealing Court Records: Try Asking The motion needs to show either that the original reasons for sealing no longer apply or that the public interest in disclosure now outweighs the need for secrecy.
The arguments mirror the ones that justified sealing in the first place. A trade secret that has become public knowledge no longer needs protection. A minor who has reached adulthood may no longer face the same risks. A concluded investigation no longer requires secrecy. Courts weigh each request against current facts.
The process can be less formal than people expect. Federal courts have unsealed records in response to letter requests from journalists, with judges construing the letters as motions even when no attorney drafted them.8The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. First Step in Unsealing Court Records: Try Asking A formal motion with legal argument will still carry more weight, especially when someone is pushing back on the request.