The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
You Don't Need a Local Lawyer to Get a Case Unsealed
Each one of us has the right to access court records, so we can just sue pro se (though it helps to know the legal rules).
An astute commenter on the Oklahoma sealed libel case thread observed that, carpetbagger that I am, I was going into Oklahoma court without being an Oklahoma lawyer. But that's because I'm asserting my own rights as a citizen to access court records, so I'm representing myself pro se. I don't need to be (or to have) a local lawyer for that—or any lawyer at all.
Indeed, it turns out that just yesterday the Hawaii Supreme Court expressly so held, in Grube v. Trader (though it's not a controversial point):
Grube also challenges the circuit court's directive that he retain counsel to assert his objections to the sealing of the documents. Grube contends that, throughout his motion to unseal, he used the first person and personally signed all the pleadings. Grube explains that the Civil Beat address referenced in the motion appears in the "office address" portion of the caption to comply with HRPP Rule 2.2(d)(1). The public's constitutional right of access is not unique to the news media…. "The right of media representatives to be present is derived from their status as members of the general public." … Any member of the public may assert a personal right to access judicial proceedings and records.
Additionally, the right of self-representation exists in both criminal and civil proceedings. This is reflected in Hawaii statutes regulating the practice of law, which expressly preserve the right of every natural person to "appear[] in person before any court, and there prosecut[e] or defend[] that person's, plaintiff's, defendant's, or accused's own cause, without the aid of legal counsel." HRS § 605-2.
Other states have similar statutes to the Hawaii statute cited at the end of the quote.
To get the Volokh Conspiracy Daily e-mail, please sign up here.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
“(though it helps to know the legal rules)” should have been in all caps and bold.
===Other states have similar statutes to the Hawaii statute cited at the end of the quote.===
Doesn’t this ultimately derive from the idea that if the government forces you to have a lawyer (and a government-supplied one if necessary) that this taints your defense by the government sticking its finger in it?
“You’re dumb to proceed without, but we can’t force you to use us in your defense.”