10 canonical passages across 8 cases, quoted by 59 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. National Children's Center, Inc..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. National Children's Center, Inc. Anchor | green | “the starting point in considering a motion to seal court records is a 'strong presumption in favor of public access to judicial proceedings.” | 12 |
| 2 | Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. National Children's Center, Inc. | green | “strong presumption in favor of public access to judicial proceedings.” | 10 |
| 3 | Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. National Children's Center, Inc. | green | “the purposes for which the documents were introduced during the judicial proceedings.” | 8 |
| 4 | MetLife, Inc. v. Financial Stability Oversight Council | green | “is fundamental to a democratic state.” | 6 |
| 5 | United States of America Ex Rel Sanjay Grover v. Related Companies, L.P. | green | “the more relevant a pleading is to the central claims of the litigation, the stronger the presumption of unsealing the pleading becomes.” | 5 |
| 6 | Washington Legal Foundation v. United States Sentencing Commission | green | “the common law bestows upon the public a right of access to public records and documents.” | 4 |
| 7 | United States Ex Rel. Durham v. Prospect Waterproofing, Inc. | green | “the more relevant a pleading is to the central claims of the litigation, the stronger the presumption of unsealing the pleading becomes.” | 4 |
| 8 | Friedman v. Sebelius | green | “whether disclosure of the documents will lead to prejudice in future litigation to the party seeking the seal.” | 4 |
| 9 | In Re Grand Jury Subpoena, Miller | green | “ensure that 'persons who are accused but exonerated by the grand jury will not be held up to public ridicule.” | 3 |
| 10 | Hyatt v. Kappos | green | “allow the public to understand the rulings as well as the contours of the disputes between the parties.” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.