Open court means that court proceedings and most court records are available to the public by default. Anyone can walk into a courtroom and watch a hearing or trial, and anyone can read most of the documents filed in a case. Two parts of the Constitution protect this: the Sixth Amendment gives a criminal defendant the right to a public trial, and the First Amendment gives the public its own, independent right to attend.1Legal Information Institute. Sixth Amendment2Justia Law. Richmond Newspapers Inc v Virginia, 448 US 555 (1980) A judge can close the doors only in narrow situations, and only after making specific findings on the record.
The public right matters on its own. In Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia, the Supreme Court held that the First Amendment protects “the right of everyone to attend trials,” and that a court cannot simply close doors that have historically been open.2Justia Law. Richmond Newspapers Inc v Virginia, 448 US 555 (1980) So even if a defendant would rather keep a hearing private, the public retains its own constitutional interest in watching. The Sixth Amendment right also reaches beyond the trial itself to pretrial proceedings like suppression hearings and jury selection.3Congress.gov. Right to a Public Trial Doctrine
Who Can Walk Into a Courtroom
Most courtrooms seat the public on a first-come, first-served basis.4United States Courts. Access to Court Proceedings You do not need to be a party, a lawyer, or a journalist. You do not need a reason. Federal courts post their calendars online, and local courts list their schedules the same way, so you can look up a case or just show up and watch whatever is on the docket that morning.
Expect security screening at the door. Phones have to be silenced, and most courtrooms do not allow photography or recording. Dress is business-casual by convention; shorts, tank tops, and flip-flops tend to draw a word from the bailiff, especially in federal court. Talking, eating, or reading unrelated material during a proceeding will too. Treat it like someone else’s workplace and you will not have any trouble.
Reading Court Records
Open court extends to the paper. Complaints, motions, orders, and judgments are generally public records you can inspect. For federal cases, the Public Access to Court Electronic Records system (PACER) offers online access to more than a billion documents from federal courts.5Public Access to Court Electronic Records. Public Access to Court Electronic Records You can also view files at public terminals in the clerk’s office of the court where a case was filed.6United States Courts. Find a Case (PACER)
PACER charges $0.10 per page for documents, docket reports, and search results, capped at $3.00 for any single document. If you run up $30 or less in fees in a quarter, you owe nothing.7PACER: Federal Court Records. PACER Pricing: How Fees Work For checking on one case, you are unlikely to be billed at all. State courts run their own systems with their own fees; some post docket information free online and charge only for copies.
Watching Remotely
Showing up is not the only option, though what is available depends on the type of case. All federal circuit courts of appeal release audio recordings of oral arguments, and individual circuits decide whether to stream them live. The Ninth Circuit goes the furthest and streams video of oral arguments on its website.8United States Courts. Remote Public Access to Proceedings
At the trial-court level, a policy effective in September 2023 lets the public listen to live audio of certain civil and bankruptcy non-trial proceedings, as long as no witness is testifying. Whether that audio is actually turned on for a given hearing is up to the individual judge.8United States Courts. Remote Public Access to Proceedings
Federal criminal cases are the exception. Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 53 prohibits photographing or broadcasting judicial proceedings from the courtroom, which rules out livestream and remote video.9United States Courts. History of Cameras, Broadcasting, and Remote Public Access in Courts If you want to watch a federal criminal trial, you have to come in person. State courts set their own rules on cameras, and many are more permissive than the federal system.
When a Judge Can Close the Doors
The presumption of openness is strong, not absolute. A judge can restrict access, but only when a specific competing interest outweighs transparency and the restriction is kept narrow. Vague worries do not qualify.
In Press-Enterprise Co. v. Superior Court, the Supreme Court held that the presumption of open proceedings “may be overcome only by an overriding interest based on findings that closure is essential to preserve higher values and is narrowly tailored to serve that interest.”10Legal Information Institute. Press-Enterprise Co v Superior Court, 478 US 1 (1986) Under the Sixth Amendment, Waller v. Georgia requires the party seeking closure to show an overriding interest likely to be prejudiced by openness, keep the closure no broader than necessary, consider reasonable alternatives, and support the decision with adequate findings.11Justia Law. Waller v Georgia, 467 US 39 (1984) Skip any one of those steps and the closure is vulnerable on appeal.
In practice, a handful of situations show up again and again:
- Juvenile proceedings. Most states close delinquency hearings by default to protect minors from lasting public exposure.
- Classified information. The Classified Information Procedures Act allows private hearings when the Attorney General certifies that a public proceeding could disclose classified material.
- Trade secrets. Federal rules let courts issue protective orders covering trade secrets and confidential business information, and the courtroom can be briefly closed when that information comes up.
- Witness safety. In cases involving organized crime or witness intimidation, a court can limit who is in the room during testimony or shield a witness’s identity.
- Fair trial concerns. When pretrial publicity threatens an impartial jury, a judge can close a specific pretrial hearing after finding a substantial probability of prejudice and that alternatives like jury instructions or a venue change would not fix it.10Legal Information Institute. Press-Enterprise Co v Superior Court, 478 US 1 (1986)
Each stage gets its own analysis. A judge who closes jury selection cannot use the same order to close opening statements. And when the issue is a single piece of sensitive evidence rather than a whole proceeding, judges often resolve it with in camera review, examining the material privately in chambers before deciding what, if anything, becomes part of the public record.
Sealed Records Are a Separate Thing
Closing a hearing and sealing a record are not the same. A closure keeps people out of the courtroom during a specific proceeding. Sealing removes a specific document from the public case file and stores it separately, potentially long after the hearing has ended. Sealing requires its own court order, and the party asking for it has to show a compelling reason that outweighs the public’s interest in access. Juvenile records and documents containing trade secrets are among the categories most commonly sealed. Rules differ between federal and state courts, and some states do not allow sealing for certain record types at all.