Back to Results

DocumentCloud_Epstein_Docs_p00015.png

Source: DOCUMENTCLOUD  •  Size: 279.9 KB  •  OCR Confidence: 94.9%
View Original Image

Extracted Text (OCR)

Case 18-2868, Document 273-2, 08/09/2019, 2628218, Page10 of 25 summary judgment materials and individualized review of the remaining sealed materials. While the law governing public access to these materials is largely settled, we have not yet adequately addressed the potential harms that often accompany such access. These harms are apparent. Over forty years ago, the Supreme Court observed that, without vigilance, courts’ files might “become a vehicle for improper purposes.”° Our legal process is already susceptible to abuse. Unscrupulous litigants can weaponize the discovery process to humiliate and embarrass their adversaries. Shielded by the “litigation privilege,” bad actors can defame opponents in court pleadings or depositions without fear of lawsuit and liability. Unfortunately, the presumption of public access to court documents has the potential to exacerbate these harms to privacy and reputation by ensuring that damaging material irrevocably enters the public record. We therefore take the opportunity to describe the tools available to district courts in protecting the integrity of the judicial process, and emphasize the courts’ responsibility to exercise these powerful tools. We also caution the public to critically assess allegations contained in judicial pleadings. ° Nixon v. Warner Commc'ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 598 (1978). 10 See notes 46-47 and accompanying text, post. 10

Document Preview

DocumentCloud_Epstein_Docs_p00015.png

Click to view full size

Extracted Information

Dates

Document Details

Filename DocumentCloud_Epstein_Docs_p00015.png
File Size 279.9 KB
OCR Confidence 94.9%
Has Readable Text Yes
Text Length 1,419 characters
Indexed 2026-02-04 12:22:06.531616