The Associated Press v. Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts

Case Number: 1:26-cv-03219

Court: U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia

Client: The Associated Press

Background: Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2(c) is a little-known rule that blocks the public and the press from accessing electronic court records filed in immigration cases, including habeas corpus petitions in which noncitizens seek release from detentions that they allege violate their constitutional rights. 

Most other federal civil filings are publicly accessible via PACER, the electronic system for federal court records. But Rule 5.2(c), which dates back to 2007, forces any journalist seeking to cover fast-moving developments in immigration habeas cases to travel to the court where the case was filed and request to access the records in-person.

Under the second Trump administration, there has been a sharp rise in immigration habeas cases. But Rule 5.2(c) has prevented journalists from reporting on these cases in a timely fashion, impeding coverage of how the federal government is carrying out its immigration enforcement policies and treating detainees in its custody. 

On behalf of The Associated Press, Reporters Committee attorneys filed this lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Rule 5.2(c). 

The lawsuit claims the rule violates the First Amendment because it imposes content-based restrictions on immigration case filings based solely on the subject matter of the case and because it unduly restricts the right of the press and public to access judicial records. It asks the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to declare Rule 5.2(c) unconstitutional and “require federal courts to treat immigration case records the same as all other civil records, instead of shielding them from public view.”

Quote: “Rule 5.2(c) unconstitutionally keeps the press and public in the dark about the huge numbers of immigrants being held in federal detention and how those people are being treated by the government,” said Reporters Committee attorney Renee Griffin. “The public has a significant interest in understanding the impact of the federal government’s nationwide immigration crackdown, yet so many important stories are hidden by this court rule.” 

Related: Reporters Committee has previously argued that this rule, which federal courts can lift on a case-by-case or court-by-court basis, creates obstacles to access that “produce harmful consequences on a nationwide scale.” Last year, a federal appeals court removed the restrictions in a high-profile immigration case in response to a motion Reporters Committee attorneys filed on behalf of The Intercept. Our attorneys have also sent a series of letters to federal district courts across the country requesting they lift these restrictions.

Filings:

2026-09-15: Complaint