This is the key factor that I think a lot of HN pundits are not understanding on this topic. The answer to "How can the judge do that" is: judges have broad le

This is the key factor that I think a lot of HN pundits are not understanding on this topic. The answer to "How can the judge do that" is: judges have broad leeway over how they interpret "fairness" in their courtroom. It is incumbent upon the parties in the lawsuit to disagree with the judge; silence implies assent. So the question people should be asking isn't "How can the judge be allowed to do that?" It has a simple answer. "He's a judge and this makes the most sense to him." The interesting question is "Why isn't the DOJ challenging the judge's seals in the interest of public knowledge?" And here you have your answer: the Executive over the past several years has seen fit to lean in the direction that it is not necessary to flay trade secrets out into the public sphere (a harm that cannot be reversed) to conduct a prosecution. It is, in their eyes, a better pursuit of justice. (If the public disagrees, recourse is through making it an electoral issue for choosing President or pressuring the legislature to pass a law that constrains a judge's authority on protecting trade secrets).