Automatic vs. Petition-Based Expungement

Last verified: April 2026

The Uptake Problem

The most important finding in expungement research comes from the University of Michigan and the Cato Institute: of all people legally eligible for petition-based expungement, only 6.5% to 15% ever file. The rest — 85% or more of eligible individuals — never obtain the relief they are entitled to.

Only 6.5% of eligible individuals obtained expungement within five years of becoming eligible. The vast majority of people who could benefit from expungement never receive it.

Prescott & Starr, University of Michigan Law Review (2020)

The reasons are well-documented: legal complexity, filing costs (ranging from $0 to $450+), the need for an attorney in many jurisdictions, transportation barriers, court scheduling, work conflicts, and — perhaps most significantly — people simply not knowing they are eligible. The criminal legal system does not notify you when you become eligible for expungement. You must find out on your own, navigate the process yourself, and hope you get it right.

This is the problem that automatic expungement was designed to solve.

Automatic Expungement: How It Works

Automatic expungement — often called "Clean Slate" — shifts the burden from the individual to the state. Instead of requiring each person to file a petition, hire a lawyer, appear in court, and wait for a ruling, the state identifies eligible records through its databases and clears them without any action from the individual.

The concept began with Pennsylvania's Clean Slate Act of 2018, which automated expungement for certain non-conviction records and minor offenses. Since then, the model has expanded dramatically. By 2026, 13 states have enacted some form of automatic cannabis expungement:

Key advantages of automatic expungement:

• No petition, lawyer, or court appearance required
• No filing fees
• Reaches the 85%+ of eligible people who never file petitions
• Reduces racial disparities in who obtains relief (petition-based systems disproportionately benefit those with resources)

Key disadvantages:

• Implementation delays of 1 to 3 years after the law is enacted
• Requires significant IT infrastructure investment (Connecticut spent $8 million)
• Limited to offenses the state can identify in its databases (older paper records may be missed)
• Typically covers a narrower range of offenses than petition-based systems

The Scale of Automatic Clearance

When automatic expungement works, it works at a scale that petition-based systems cannot match. Michigan's experience is the most striking example: when the state activated its automated system, it processed 1.4 million records in the first week. No petition-based system in history has cleared that many records in a decade.

Petition-Based Expungement: How It Works

Petition-based expungement requires the individual to take affirmative legal action. The typical process involves:

1. Obtaining your criminal history records
2. Determining eligibility under state law
3. Preparing and filing a petition with the court
4. Paying filing fees (if applicable)
5. Attending a hearing (in some jurisdictions)
6. Waiting for the judge's ruling
7. Following up to verify records are actually updated

Petition-based systems remain the more common approach. Nearly every state offers some form of petition-based expungement or sealing for cannabis offenses. And petition-based systems have one significant advantage over automatic systems: they typically cover a wider range of offenses, including felonies and distribution charges that automatic systems often exclude.

Key advantages of petition-based expungement:

• Available in nearly every state
• Often covers a broader range of offenses
• Allows for case-specific arguments and judicial discretion
• Can address multi-jurisdictional records

Key disadvantages:

• Only 6.5–15% of eligible people ever file
• Filing fees range from $0 to $450+
• Often requires an attorney ($400–$5,000+)
• Process takes months to over a year in most states
• Disproportionately benefits those with resources, time, and legal knowledge

The Best Approach: Both

The most effective states combine both approaches. Illinois, for example, offers automatic expungement for eligible possession charges while maintaining a petition process for more complex cases. California used Code for America's technology to identify and process eligible records at scale, then required petition filing for the actual clearance.

For individuals, the practical question is simple: does your state offer automatic clearance for your specific offense? If so, your records may already be cleared or in the queue. If not, petition-based expungement remains available — and our 50-state tracker can help you determine your options.