Every so often, a news article pops up where someone has realized that their personal information is available online, which usually prompts some discovery into how many other people have their personally identifiable information (PII) accessible. What makes these instances particularly jarring is that this information is from documents like court and land records and can be accessed by the public on a government website.
When it comes to the question of who made the mistake in allowing sensitive information to be posted in the first place, the answer varies. For Pinellas County’s minor citations, a redaction vendor may have missed the mark, but it’s rare that culpability lies with a county or its vendors because it’s often the responsibility of the filer, not the government, to ensure PII is redacted.
This was the case in North Dakota, where filers had been responsible for redacting PII for over a decade and had left so much information in their court documents that the state had to revoke access to all of their court records.
Despite the hiccups we’re seeing, the tide is consistently pushing toward increasing access to public records. Missouri is the latest state to offer access to its court records, as the state made its Case.net filing system open to the public at the end of last month. Opening the system to the public coincided with two new laws containing requirements for lawyers to redact PII in their filings.
As access to the files went live, a local Fox affiliate began digging into the database and was able to find sensitive information, including social security numbers, in the files. Since the state is only posting records on a day-forward basis, there aren’t many records that could potentially contain PII, but it’s not a great start.
State Rep. David Evans explained that, “It’s up to the individual person that files it that meets the requirement of the law. Is it the easiest thing in the world? Probably not, but I think there’s a good-faith effort to try and stop this. The courts are moving in the direction to comply with this new law.”
While most lawyers should have access to quality redaction tools and have a strong knowledge of the requirements, they’re not perfect. Citizens filing themselves may be in for even more of a struggle.
What some counties and states have done is to add an extra layer of protection for their open records. While they may state that PII redaction is the responsibility of the filer, they will use automated redaction software to identify any information that needs to be removed. Software like this, including Extract’s ID Shield, is also used all of the country to redact PII in historical files to prepare them for access or even to pinpoint language like discriminatory restrictive covenants found in older land records for removal.
The balance in providing the public access to information they have a right to see and protecting people’s identities is contentious. Increased access to files inevitably seems to uncover redaction mistakes, leading to unwanted information being available. But even if everything were perfectly redacted, some argue that there is too little left to be useful. The Missouri Lawyers Media article gave the example of someone who would want to know whether a local criminal is 18 or 58 years old, but wouldn’t be able to do so with date of birth information redacted.
As records move online, exponentially increasing their accessibility, the reality is that PII can’t be left in the files. Counties and states should consider incorporating automated redaction as part of their filing process to ensure their citizens’ personal information is secure. If you’d like to learn more about how to get started or hear what other clients have done, please don’t hesitate to reach out.
About the Author: Chris Mack
Chris is a Marketing Manager at Extract with experience in product development, data analysis, and both traditional and digital marketing. Chris received his bachelor’s degree in English from Bucknell University and has an MBA from the University of Notre Dame. A passionate marketer, Chris strives to make complex ideas more accessible to those around him in a compelling way.