The Supreme Court is a notoriously secretive institution, and that opacity can frustrate those looking in from the outside.

A recent New York Times article takes aim at one piece of that secrecy: the justices' personal papers. These papers hold priceless historical insight into some of the most consequential legal decisions in American history, yet they remain the personal property of each justice, free to be preserved, donated or destroyed as they see fit.

Those pushing for a uniform requirement, or other transparency measures, are wrong. The court works best precisely because its debates happen behind closed doors. More transparency wouldn't inform the public so much as further polarize the court.

The Supreme Court works because of its secrecy 

Justice Antonin Scalia died in 2016 without leaving instructions for how, or whether, he wanted his papers released. His family eventually donated them to Harvard's law library, to be made public decades from now, but the Times reports that the absence of a defined plan is what pushed the justices to consider a uniform code for handling their papers.

"In contrast with the executive branch, which is required to preserve and ultimately make public a record of its inner workings, there are no laws to determine what the justices save, shred, burn or reveal, or when," wrote Jodi Kantor, the Times reporter behind the piece.

Kantor's framing suggests she sees that........

© USA TODAY