Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 8, 2022

Schulte v. Attorney General of the United States

Judge
Jesse Furman
Docket
1:19-cv-03346
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Schulte v. Attorney General, Judge Furman unsealed most docket documents, kept ECF No. 2-1 restricted during review, and directed notice to Schulte.

Who this affects

The public and Inner City Press gained access to most documents in the case; Schulte’s submission at ECF No. 2-1 remained restricted during court review.

What happened

In Schulte v. Attorney General of the United States, Inner City Press asked the court to make documents in the civil case available to the public. The case had been sealed before it was reassigned to Judge Jesse M. Furman.

The court concluded that most of the docket did not need to remain sealed. It ordered the Clerk to remove viewing restrictions from those documents, while keeping the plaintiff’s submission at ECF No. 2-1 available only to the court and case participants while it was reviewed.

Judge Jesse M. Furman ordered the Clerk to mail a copy of the order to Joshua Adam Schulte at the Metropolitan Detention Center. The order did not decide the underlying issues in Schulte’s case.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Schulte v. Attorney General of the United States · No. 1:19-cv-03346
Judge
Jesse Furman
Date
July 8, 2022

Background

The case had been sealed before it was reassigned to Judge Jesse M. Furman. On July 5, 2022, Matthew Russell Lee, representing Inner City Press, submitted a request to unseal documents. The request stated that Inner City Press could not access many filings in the civil case, including filings identified by docket numbers 5, 6, 7, 8, 14, and 17.

Ruling

The court concluded that there was no reason for most of the docket to remain under seal. It ordered the Clerk of Court to remove all viewing restrictions from the documents in the case except the plaintiff’s submission at ECF No. 2-1. That submission was to remain available only for court and participant viewing while the court reviewed whether it needed to stay sealed.

Effect of the Order

The order made most of the case docket publicly viewable and left open the possibility that ECF No. 2-1 would later be unsealed. The Clerk was also directed to mail a copy of the order to Joshua Adam Schulte at the Metropolitan Detention Center. This order addressed access to sealed filings; it did not decide the underlying claims or motions described in the filings.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.