Stevens defends publishing the intercepted call as protected speech
John Paul StevensAssociate justice writing the Supreme Court's majority opinion
Stevens defends First Amendment protection for these disclosures.
“a stranger's illegal conduct does not suffice to remove the First Amendment shield from speech about a matter of public concern.”
Original text
Where this statement fits
Bartnicki v. Vopper: justices split over publishing an illegally intercepted call
The Supreme Court protected publication of a recorded call by recipients who did not participate in the illegal interception and lawfully obtained the tape afterward. John Paul Stevens's majority emphasizes public concern. William Rehnquist's dissent stresses privacy and incentives for interception.
Source and context
Original text
About this source
The opinions consider publication by recipients who did not participate in the interception, lawfully received the tape and published material of public concern.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)Before the quotation
The publishers did not participate in the unlawful interception.
After the quotation
The holding concerns information of public concern.
How this statement is classified
The label describes this statement's response within the context above.
Why this label?
The case concerns publication of this intercepted call, assessed on the majority's accepted premises of lawful receipt by nonparticipating recipients and public concern. Stevens defends First Amendment protection for these disclosures.
- Recorded on
- Published here
More from this case
Read the full caseThe ACLU welcomes protection for public-concern reporting
American Civil Liberties Union
“Today’s decision once again reaffirms the First Amendment right of the media to publish and broadcast information of public concern.”Read statement
Rehnquist rejects constitutional protection for the challenged broadcast
“The Constitution should not protect the involuntary broadcast of personal conversations.”Read statement
Share or embed this statement
The embed keeps its attribution link to The Dispute Index. Credit the image to The Dispute Index and link to the statement page.
Cite this record
- Publisher
- The Dispute Index
- Title
- Stevens defends publishing the intercepted call as protected speech
- First published
- Last updated
- Permalink
- https://disputeindex.com/events/6726-stevens-defends-first-amendment-protection-for-these-disclosures
Last updated marks the most recent saved version of this published statement.
The Dispute Index. "Stevens defends publishing the intercepted call as protected speech". First published: 2026-10-25. Last updated: 2026-10-25. https://disputeindex.com/events/6726-stevens-defends-first-amendment-protection-for-these-disclosures