Protective Order
A court order limiting what can be shared from discovery — often used by defendants to hide embarrassing evidence.
What It Is
A protective order under Federal Rule 26(c) limits the use or disclosure of information obtained during discovery. The court can issue one upon a showing of “good cause” to protect a party from “annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden.”
How Defendants Use Them
Government defendants in § 1983 cases routinely seek protective orders to:
- Prevent you from sharing body camera footage publicly
- Keep internal affairs files confidential
- Restrict disclosure of officer personnel records
- Prevent media access to discovery materials
How to Respond
Protective orders aren’t automatic. The defendant must show good cause — not just assert it. Arguments against overbroad protective orders:
- Public interest — Police misconduct is a matter of public concern. The public has a right to know how its officers behave.
- First Amendment — Broad gag orders on discovery materials may implicate free speech
- Narrowly tailored — Even if some protection is warranted (e.g., Social Security numbers, home addresses), it shouldn’t cover the substance of the misconduct
- Propose a tiered order — Agree to redact personal information while keeping the substantive facts public
The Practical Impact
If you agree to a broad protective order, you may not be able to:
- Share evidence with journalists
- Post body camera footage online
- Discuss the details of what you found in discovery
- Help future plaintiffs suing the same officer
Think carefully before agreeing. Negotiate narrow terms that protect legitimate privacy interests (officer home addresses, witness personal information) without hiding misconduct.
Key Rules
- Rule 26(c) — Protective orders
- Rule 5.2 — Privacy protections for filings (SSNs, minors’ names, financial accounts)