Defender General tells House Judiciary Committee public court records should be accessible online
Loading...
Summary
At a Feb. 4 House Judiciary hearing, the Defender General (Matt) testified for H572, saying the default should be online access to court records, including criminal files and orders, while carving out narrow privacy exceptions; he urged clear statutory direction so courts can adopt rules.
The Defender General, identified in the transcript as Matt, urged the House Judiciary Committee on Feb. 4 to make public court records broadly accessible online under H572, arguing that public access to primary-source materials reduces misinformation.
Matt said he was appointed Defender General in 2001 and described how his views on public access have evolved: "First, I thought that, you know, if it was a pub public record, it should be available to everybody," he said, then worried about misuse, and later concluded "because of the Internet in general, there really isn't anything that is secret," so giving public access to primary sources is essential.
Why it matters: Committee members and the Defender General debated how to balance transparency with privacy. Matt recommended that the statutory default be that documents available for in-person inspection should also be accessible online, including court orders and criminal filings, while explicitly protecting narrow categories of sensitive documents such as certain family income and asset affidavits or medical material that might contain Social Security numbers.
The hearing also probed practical limits. A committee member asked whether H572 would cover law-enforcement body-camera footage; the committee and Matt agreed footage would only be covered if it is filed in the court record (for example, as an exhibit or part of a motion). Matt said evidence that becomes part of the record should be accessible, but acknowledged that creating an "evidence portal" or singular open docket is a separate operational question and likely a matter for court rulemaking.
On implementation, committee members noted that the courts will need to adopt rules to carry out any statutory policy. Matt urged clarity in the statute about the policy default so the courts rulemaking can implement precise exceptions and access mechanisms.
The committee did not take a vote during the hearing; members closed by scheduling further committee business and requesting the Defender Generals budget testimony for the coming week.
The committee record indicates further rulemaking and technical details will determine how H572 operates in practice.
