Grube v. Trader; State v. Rogan
Hawaii Supreme Court held that law requiring courts to “seal or otherwise remove all judiciary files” from any publicly accessible electronic judicial database must be interpreted as providing two options to avoid constitutional issue: removal of judicial records from the judiciary’s only qualifying database, but keeping them publicly available for in-person review at the courthouse; or sealing of court records on a case-by-case basis, subject to procedural and substantive safeguards. In reaching that result, the court held that the statute could not permit automatic sealing without individualized judicial review — or removal that was functionally equivalent to such blanket sealing — without infringing the public’s right to access court records under the state constitution’s free speech and press guarantee or violating separation of powers by encroaching on the judiciary’s exclusive authority over its judicial records. Because the substantive requirements for sealing were not met in the cases of the two defendants at issue, the court ruled their judicial files must only be removed from the electronic database.
Related Commentary
State Court Oral Arguments to Watch for in June
Issues on the dockets include partisan gerrymandering, fines and fees imposed on indigent defendants, and bans on flavored tobacco and online vision tests.