In February, Judge Kadija Babb presided over one of her highest-profile trials since being elected to the bench in 2022. The accused in the case, Demontrey Logsdon, would be found guilty of killing two victims outside Cobra Bar in 2018. During the trial, Babb filed a sealing order, ordering any “lists, records or documents of jurors” in the case to be sealed and made unavailable to members of the public. 

Her action was one the courts take all the time, balancing the interests and security of parties in a case with the transparency demanded by a public court system. Established case law places a burden upon the court to show why something is not available to the public. Babb’s order isn’t perfect — it leaves out an argument for why those documents should be sealed — but because she filed it, members of the public at least know that those documents exist, even if they are not accessible. 

Babb’s order, though, was rare. More often than not in Davidson County Criminal Court, judges simply aren’t following the rules. 

In response to a request from the Banner to see the last ten sealing orders filed in criminal cases, the Criminal Court Clerk’s office could only produce two orders for all of 2024. Time and again, criminal judges are sealing matters before their court and never leaving a public record.

“I have gone through the last several months of sealed filings and only located two instances where there was a notice or order sealing the filing,” Andy Sullivan, director of state trial courts in the Criminal Court Clerk’s office, said in response to the request. “The rest have just been filed ex-parte sealed.”

To seal a case filing in court proceedings, state law and established precedent require judges to file a written order describing why the need to seal that file outweighs the public interest in the case. 

“The presumption of openness may be overcome only by an overriding interest based on findings that closure is essential to preserve higher values and is narrowly tailored to serve that interest,” the Tennessee Supreme Court ruled unanimously in the 1985 case of State v. Drake, which set the rules for how to handle sealing a case. “The interest is to be articulated along with findings specific enough that a reviewing court can determine whether the closure order was properly entered.”

With Davidson County Criminal Courts not following that procedure, it could give the impression of secret court proceedings, away from the prying eyes of the public. The scope of the problem is potentially massive as there are thousands of cases pending in Davidson County Criminal Court at any one moment.

“There should be a written order every time the courts seal information, and it should explain why they’re sealing it,” said Deb Fisher, Executive Director of Tennessee Coalition for Open Government. “The fact that that is not happening in Davidson County [Criminal] Courts is alarming.”

Like other government entities, the courts are public. That means that court proceedings have to be open to the public, and the documents they produce also must be accessible. As with any laws surrounding public and open government, there are exceptions. But those exceptions are strict. 

Even when a judge does have a valid reason to make a sealing order, case law requires that sealing to be as “narrowly tailored” as possible. While in very rare instances there could be reason to seal an entire case, more often the courts only need to seal one filing, or even just redact a few lines of a document. 

Tennessee, in line with states across the country, has a strong “presumption of access” regarding court records. That principle is guided by a wide breadth of case law setting that precedent, including Doe by Doe v. Brentwood Academy Inc. as recently as 2018. 

The issue is compounded in Davidson County because there is no front-facing database for the public. Not only does the public have to ask — and know what to ask for — in order to access criminal court documents in Davidson County, but when a judge seals a criminal court document, it is removed from the public electronic case docket altogether. As a result, the public has no way to even know of the existence of some orders, motions and filings. 

“Information can only be utilized when it is accessible, and any barriers that inhibit that access are detrimental to the public, and to the press as well,” said Jennifer Safstrom, director of the Stanton Foundation First Amendment Clinic at Vanderbilt University. “It should be as simple as possible, and the more barriers that exist for folks, the harder it is to actually achieve the purported transparency that is being espoused.”

Most courts — from Davidson County Circuit Court up to the U.S. Supreme Court — make documents available online. That looks different depending on the court. While some are freely accessible through a database, others require a subscription, and some even require users to pay for each document they access. 

But Davidson County is different. To access criminal court documents, you have to go to the criminal courthouse, use a dedicated terminal, and ask a clerk for them. 

“Ensuring that there is an understanding of how our judicial system is operating on the whole, but also how decisions are being reached in individual cases are both really important to a well functioning judiciary as a whole,” said Safstrom.