Attorneys representing witnesses who appear before investigative grand juries are not absolutely barred from discussing anything that occurred during the proceedings, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has ruled, providing some clarity for a secretive system that some lawyers have said is increasingly causing confusion.

A split Supreme Court ruled Tuesday morning in In re Fortieth Statewide Investigating Grand Jury that a supervising grand jury judge’s holding was overly broad, and that entry-of-appearance forms do not bar attorneys from discussing anything learned during the proceedings.