Judge sides with Missouri journalists, lawyers in fight against sweeping court redactions

Jack Suntrup, St. Louis Post-Dispatch on Dec 24, 2024

By clicking submit, I authorize Arcamax and its affiliates to: (1) use, sell, and share my information for marketing purposes, including cross-context behavioral advertising, as described in our Privacy Policy , (2) add to information that I provide with other information like interests inferred from web page views, or data lawfully obtained from data brokers, such as past purchase or location data, or publicly available data, (3) contact me or enable others to contact me by email or other means with offers for different types of goods and services, and (4) retain my information while I am engaging with marketing messages that I receive and for a reasonable amount of time thereafter. I understand I can opt out at any time through an email that I receive, or by clicking here

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. — A Missouri judge last week torpedoed parts of a state law that have required sweeping redactions to court records, preventing the public from accessing routine information.

Moniteau County Associate Circuit Judge Aaron Martin ruled provisions requiring redaction of witness and victim information from court records violate the First and Fourteenth amendments to the U.S. Constitution, and the Missouri Constitution’s open-courts requirement.

Martin, in a two-page order issued on Friday, declared the two provisions unconstitutional and thereby unenforceable.

The 2023 law required attorneys and judicial officers to redact the names of all witnesses and victims involved in lawsuits and criminal proceedings.

That resulted in one of the most restrictive redaction laws in the country that prevents news reporters, appellate lawyers and regular citizens from obtaining routine information, including the names of people killed in homicides, from public court records, the plaintiffs argued.

Mark Sableman, attorney for the Missouri Broadcasters Association, one of the plaintiffs in the case, said in a statement he was gratified the judge agreed the “blanket ban” on witness and victim names in court filings was unconstitutional.

“His order restores Missouri court filings to the way they have always been for centuries, until last year — transparent and open to the public, except for those unusual situations where there is a proven need for confidentiality,” Sableman said.

Maddie Sieren, spokesperson for the Missouri attorney general’s office, which defended the provisions in court, did not immediately say whether the state would appeal the ruling.

The ruling followed a lawsuit filed on behalf of lawyers and journalists in May. Arguments in the case took place Dec. 4 in Cole County Circuit Court.

In addition to the Missouri Broadcasters Association, other plaintiffs were attorneys Michael Gross and Nina McDonnell, Gateway Journalism Review publisher William Freivogel and Gray Local Media, owner of KMOV-TV (Channel 4).

Chad Mahoney, president and CEO of the broadcasters associated, said in a statement the decision wasn’t just a win for journalists and lawyers, but “for every Missourian and every person interested in government transparency.”

Two lawyers, a journalism review publisher and Missouri's association of broadcast journalists say a state law requiring sweeping redactions in court documents is unconstitutional.

Court records online include private information for thousands of Missouri residents

Documents containing Social Security numbers and other private information for thousands of Missourians are accessible to anyone using the Casenet website, the state’s judicial records system.

_____