United States v. Business of the Custer Battlefield Museum & Store

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that “[a]ffidavits in support of seizure or search warrants . . . clearly fall within the definition of judicial documents” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• holding that \the public has a qualified common law right of access to warrant materials after an investigation has been terminated\
• stating that the Ninth Circuit had “expressly reserved whether the public has a constitutional right of access after an investigation has been terminated”
• indicating that redaction, rather than complete disclosure, should be used, when possible, in cases implicating the common law right of access
• noting that, even where there is a right of access to warrant materials, “courts have recognized several concerns that may call for redaction”
• stating that the privacy interests of informants can be protected “through a court’s discretion either to release redacted versions of the documents or, if necessary, to deny access altogether . . . .”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).