From our motion for a preliminary injunction, filed today by my lawyers, Susan L. Kay, Jennifer Safstrom, and Ryan Riedmueller of the Vanderbilt Law School Stanton Foundation First Amendment Clinic:
American citizens enjoy a First Amendment right of access to judicial records that state and local governments may not restrict unless the restriction withstands constitutional scrutiny. See Detroit Free Press v. Ashcroft, 303 F.3d 681, 700 (6th Cir. 2002). The Tennessee Public Records Act ("TPRA") includes a provision that restricts access to public records, including judicial records, to residents of Tennessee. Tenn. Code Ann. § 10-7-503(a)(2)(A). The First Amendment is a fundamental right enjoyed by all Americans and cannot be abridged by a state statute based on an individual's state citizenship.
Additionally, the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the United State constitution prohibits states from burdening a fundamental right on the basis of state citizenship. Because the TPRA restricts rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution on the basis of state citizenship, it is unconstitutional.
On February 5 and March 5, 2025, Plaintiff Eugene Volokh, a California resident, was impermissibly denied access to public judicial records by Defendants because of his residency status. {Mr. Volokh [had] submitted a request … via email for records filed in Garramone v. Curtsinger, No. 22-CV-602, a case in Williamson County Circuit Court.} {In this case, one party requested an order of protection from the court against the opposing party based on activities the opposing party claimed were protected by the First Amendment. As a leading First Amendment scholar, especially within the context of harassment, Mr. Volokh requested documents from this case to assist his research.} …
Our motion argues that the right of access to judicial records is a First Amendment right; the Sixth Circuit had already recognized this in Detroit Free Press, but we go through the Supreme-Court-prescribed analysis in any event:
