Idaho launched a new online tool to search its state trial-court cases on October 28, 2026. The older iCourt search remains usable through November, but the courts say it is expected to be retired by the end of the year. A video circulating among Idaho Four court watchers highlights December 1. The official announcement is more precise: the old search is available through the end of November, with its retirement expected by year’s end. Those are not the same as a court order destroying files on December 1.

The new site is courts.idaho.gov. It can tell a reader that a case exists, who is involved, which lawyers appear, when hearings are listed and what docket actions occurred. But the Idaho Judicial Branch says that, just like the old public online search, the new portal does not provide the underlying court documents. For the Idaho Four, that distinction matters. Finding a filing’s title is not the same as possessing its signed motion, exhibit or order.

Why It Matters

A case-search change can be routine technology maintenance and still create a practical problem for reporters, families and people checking government decisions. When a link changes, a previously saved search may stop working. And if someone has copied only the address or headline of a PDF instead of saving the legally accessible original, a later access restriction can leave a gap that cannot be filled from memory.

The Idaho Four record is also spread across different cases and courts. Bryan Kohberger’s original criminal case, his post-conviction petition, the families’ civil action involving Washington State University, the EWU Media public-records lawsuit and a separate Washington records-privacy dispute cannot be treated as one docket. A search that lists an entry in one court does not mean a document in another court has disappeared.

Go Deeper | The Record and the Questions

What actually changed on October 28?

According to the Idaho Supreme Court’s announcement, the new public interface searches publicly available cases across Idaho trial courts and lets users find cases and hearings without always entering a person’s name or a case number. The announcement described the change as improved flexibility and performance. It also said local courthouse kiosks had received a similar interface earlier in 2026. The announcement did not say that the court is deleting the underlying judicial records.

What remains available, and what is still missing online?

The portal provides case type, party information, attorneys, financial information and the recorded history of docket actions. It is a case-information index. The state’s notice explicitly says the online portal does not include document access. Readers seeking a motion or exhibit must use the appropriate authorized court or clerk process, any official public document collection and other lawful sources that can establish authenticity. Some documents may be sealed, restricted, replaced, unposted or unavailable to the public for legally distinct reasons.

The date in C Girl’s warning

The announcement says the previous iCourt search remains available through the end of November. That makes December 1 the first day after that stated access period. But it also says the previous portal is expected to be retired by the end of the calendar year, rather than documenting a completed shutdown on December 1. As of this October 28 release, a reader should not label a PDF ‘removed on December 1’ because that date has not occurred and no specific document-removal event has been verified.

Our five separate Idaho Four record tracks

Original criminal case: preserved rulings, warrants, evidence-related motions and the plea and sentencing record. Post-conviction petition: the separate proceedings challenging aspects of the conviction and plea. Families’ WSU case: a federal civil lawsuit, not a reopening of the murder prosecution. EWU Media v. Moscow: an Idaho public-records case concerning city and police records, with an October 20 court ruling. Walla Walla records case: a Washington dispute involving access to victim cellphone information and privacy protections. Each needs its own official docket and source trail.

How we test a suspected disappearance

Start with the filing’s title, case number, docket entry, date and last working original URL. Compare the current official docket and any formally announced replacement portal. Check for a newer file version, a legitimate redirect, temporary outage or access restrictions. Preserve the original PDF internally only when it was lawfully public and retention is permitted; keep a dated receipt and distinguish an authenticated original from a third-party copy. If a particular document truly becomes unavailable, report the last verified public date, the first observed unavailable date and the reason, if documented. A broken bookmark alone does not prove that officials sealed or removed a document.

The oversight question

The courts must explain how users can search the docket and seek accessible records. A newsroom must also do its own preservation work. A missed download is a missed opportunity to check the underlying text later. Public access, lawful redaction and the safety and privacy of victims can coexist when changes are documented rather than guessed.

What Happens Next

Before the old search is retired, compare its available docket-index entries with the replacement interface, prioritize source-identifiable Idaho Four filings in each separate case, and verify that actual PDFs were preserved in a durable restricted archive when lawful. Ask the Idaho Supreme Court Service Desk about search problems and the relevant clerk for access to a specific publicly disclosable filing. We will publish a separate evidence-based report for each distinct document whose loss of public access can be independently established, with the cause labeled unknown if it remains unknown. As of this report, no specific Idaho Four filing has been proved to have vanished because of this portal change.

For the public-records fight involving Moscow, see the separate EWU case and our Idaho Four document release tracker. Their legal questions are different from statewide court technology.