September 12, 2024
The National Center for State Courts receives numerous questions regarding access to eviction and court records through court websites. The use of court records to determine criminal backgrounds is fraught with limitations and legality issues.
Online court records provide viewers with unofficial court records, meaning users must verify the accuracy and completeness of the information displayed. There may be many “John Smiths.” There is no way to verify that the John Smith in a record is the John Smith sought. Many states and counties display warnings and disclaimers on their online portals to alert viewers of this limitation. For instance, Minnesota Court Records Online (MCRO) warns users that they do “not certify MCRO records or search results and are not responsible for any errors or omissions in the data found on MCRO.”
Additionally, online civil court records are not official and may not reflect the court’s official files. Some records or portions are sealed, some are only available on paper, and others are too old to be displayed online and exist only in the court’s archive. Despite this, individuals, employers, property owners, and web scrapers still use these records.
In several states, such as California and Georgia, the information in these systems pertains only to a single county. Without specific identifying information, such as a Social Security number, date of birth, or address, it is impossible to discern between cases where individuals have the same names. An individual must contact the court where the action was filed to find information about a specific case.
Furthermore, courts are not responsible for conducting criminal background checks, which are the responsibility of the state police. In some states, the state criminal history system runs biometric identifier (fingerprint) reports for activities within the state. These reports are not affiliated with the courts, and court records are not a substitute.
The use of such records may also be restricted or prohibited by law. For example, the Fair Chance Access to Housing Ordinance in Oakland, California, prohibits landlords from inquiring about prospective tenants’ arrest or conviction records. Similarly, New Jersey enacted the Fair Chance in Housing Act in June 2021, preventing housing providers from asking about an applicant’s criminal record before making a conditional offer. Before conducting a background check, the prospective tenant must be aware of the process and provide written consent. According to the Fair Credit Reporting Act, personal information included in a background check cannot be accessed unless for “permissible purposes” like housing applications.
There are federal limitations on how long information can be visible on consumer reports, including tenant-screening reports. For instance, eviction court cases can appear on tenant-screening records for up to 7 years. Additionally, per the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the landlord must notify a tenant if the tenant-screening or credit report was used to deny a housing offer.
Some states have protections that include limits on tenant records, including the expungement of certain records or the prohibition of using an eviction lawsuit to make determinations about renting.
How are court records being used in your state? Share it with us at knowledge@ncsc.org or call 80-616-6164. Follow the National Center for State Courts on Facebook, X, LinkedIn, and Vimeo. For more Trending Topics posts, visit ncsc.org/trendingtopics and subscribe to the LinkedIn newsletter.