The issue of whether to open or close hearings to the public in child protection cases is controversial generating discussion and debate since the establishment of the first juvenile court in 1899. Constitutional rights, personal sentiments, and the unique nature and focus of the child protection court are the foundational arguments raised when advocating either for or against public access to child protection hearings. This brief, supported by the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) begins by presenting the legal background regarding the issue of public access to child protection hearings and is followed by a synopsis of the main arguments for and against open protection hearings which include: (1) the best interests of the child; (2) public awareness of child abuse and neglect; and (3) economic and procedural consequences. The brief continues with information on the current practice on open versus closed hearings in child protection courts across the country with reference to relevant State statutes. Information and research about States that have conducted pilot projects to allow open hearings are presented, as well as States with open with discretion to close, closed with discretion/exceptions, closed hearings, and closed hearings except for population areas over 400,000. Minnesota was the first State to have a pilot project. Given the importance of the welfare of children in the child protection system, it is of absolute importance that States fully, and carefully, consider all of the issues relating to the decision of whether or not to allow public access before reaching a decision. All decisions should be framed in terms of the best interests of the child and steps should be taken to increase community awareness and education related to this issue.