Please note that these materials are provided for historical purposes only. The information presented is out of date and may be neither accurate nor useful. External hyperlinks may no longer be valid. For current court technology information, please see the new Court Technology Bulletin.
November/December 1998
Social Security Numbers in State Court Information Systems
A subcommittee of the Conference of State Court Administrators (COSCA)/National Association for Court Management (NACM) Joint Technology Committee, composed of Jerry Benedict, administrative director of the Texas Judicial System; John Greacen, director, Administrative Office of the Courts, New Mexico; L. M. (Pat) Jacobs, IV, justice court administrator, Pima County, Arizona; and Tom Ralston, court administrator, Delaware Superior Court, recently conducted a study to determine what, if any, limitations federal law places on the state courts in collecting, using, and disseminating social security numbers. Aided by opinions of the attorneys general of Arkansas and Iowa and by research conducted by staff of the state court administrator offices of Maryland, Minnesota, New Mexico, and Texas, the committee has concluded that federal law does not restrict the collection or use of social security numbers, but does restrict the release of social security numbers collected pursuant to any law enacted after October 1, 1990.
State courts require parties to provide their social security numbers for a variety of reasons. The most common is to identify the party. A growing number of court systems use case management information systems in which an individual's name, address, and telephone number are entered once, regardless of the number of cases in which the person is a party. The advantage of these systems is the ability to update an address or telephone number for all cases in which the person is a party by a single computer entry. Social security numbers provide a unique identifier by which court personnel can determine whether the current "John Smith" is the same person as a previous "John Smith" who appeared in an earlier case.
Other uses of social security numbers include collecting fees, fines, and restitution by the courts themselves (including through tax intercept programs), collecting judgments by the parties, creating jury pools and paying jurors, making payments to vendors, and providing information to other agencies (such as the motor vehicle department). Federal law now requires state courts to place the parties' social security numbers in the records relating to divorce decrees, child support orders, and paternity determinations or acknowledgments in order to facilitate the collection of child support. Effective October 1, 1999, that requirement will be extended to include the social security numbers of all children to whom support is required to be paid.
The Social Security Administration itself asks state correctional departments to identify persons who have been sentenced to jail or prison and persons for whom warrants have been issued so that their social security benefits may be cut off. The state courts of Maryland are involved in an experimental program to provide such information directly from court records.
Federal Law Applicable to Obtaining Social Security Numbers
According to Section 7(a) of the Privacy Act of 1974, Pub.L. 93-579, uncodified but appearing in the annotated code as a historical note at 5 USC §522a,
It shall be unlawful for any Federal, State or local government agency to deny to any individual any right, benefit, or privilege provided by law because of such individual's refusal to disclose his social security number.
Section 7(b) further provides
Any Federal, State or local government agency which requests an individual to disclose his social security account number shall inform that individual whether that disclosure is mandatory or voluntary, by what statutory or other authority such number is solicited, and what uses will be made of it.
The committee's research has concluded that these federal requirements do not apply to state courts. The legal analysis supporting that conclusion is relatively involved. It has been endorsed by several state attorneys general and by the general counsels of four state court systems. Persons interested in the legal analysis should refer to the committee report, which is available from the National Center for State Courts.
Federal Law Restricting the Dissemination of Social Security Numbers
Section 405(c)(2)(C)(viii)(I) of the Social Security Code provides that
Social security account numbers and related records that are obtained or maintained by an authorized person pursuant to any provision of law, enacted on or after October 1, 1990, shall be confidential, and no authorized person shall disclose any such social security number.
The committee concludes that this statute does apply to state courts. However, the committee concludes that the section should be read in context to restrict dissemination of social security numbers beyond the purposes for which they have been collected or for which their use is authorized by federal or state law. The committee recommends that state courts implement the following policies to comply with the spirit of the statute:
Official court files. State courts should not attempt to expunge or redact social security numbers that appear in documents that are public records. This same reasoning applies to income tax returns or other documents containing social security numbers filed in court. It would be unreasonable to expect courts to search every document filed for the existence of social security numbers. Further, court staff has no business altering documents filed in a case; the social security number may have evidentiary value in the case—at the very least to confirm the identity of the purported income tax filer.
Case management information databases. Data in automated information systems raises more privacy concerns than information in paper files. Automated data can be gathered quickly and in bulk, can be manipulated easily, and can be correlated easily with other personal data in electronic form. Data appearing in paper files is very hard, from a practical standpoint, to gather and aggregate. Data in an automated database also can be protected more easily from unauthorized access than data in paper files. It is feasible to restrict access to individual files in a database altogether or to limit access to specific persons or to specific categories of persons. Consequently, state courts should take steps to restrict access to social security numbers appearing in court databases. They should not be available to public inquirers. Access to them should be restricted to court staff and to other specifically authorized persons (such as child support enforcement agencies) for whose use the information has been gathered.
However, mechanisms that allow public access to court records should enable an inquirer to search for information by a social security number that the inquirer already knows. Under these circumstances, the court is not providing the social security number; the requester already has that information. The court is merely allowing the requester to obtain other public information from court files using the known social security number as the means of locating it.
Staff response to queries from the public. When court automated records include social security numbers in order to identify parties, court staff should be trained not to provide those numbers to persons who inquire at the public counter or by telephone. However, staff may confirm that the party to a case is the person with a particular social security number when the inquirer already has the social security number and provides it to the court staff member.
The committee did not attempt to survey state law to determine whether state privacy laws place any restrictions on state court collection or use of social security numbers. State courts should conduct such reviews in order to be fully assured that their collection and use of social security numbers is lawful.
For further information, contact John Greacen, Director, Administrative Office of the Courts, New Mexico, (505) 827-4800 or by e-mail at aocjmg@nmcourts.com. For a copy of the complete committee report, contact Shelley Rockwell at the National Center for State Courts at (757) 259-1534, or by e-mail at srockwell@ncsc.org.
