Breyer backs protection for the intercepted-call broadcast only on its narrow facts
Stephen BreyerSupreme Court justice, concurring with Justice O'Connor
Breyer supports protecting the broadcast in this case, stressing the recipients' lawful conduct and the unusual public concern in the threat discussed.
“I agree with its narrow holding limited to the special circumstances present here”
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
Breyer joins the Court's opinion and identifies the circumstances that support the result.
After the quotation
He warns that the decision does not imply broad constitutional immunity for the media.
How this statement is classified
The label describes this statement's response within the context above.
Why this label?
The reference point is publication of this intercepted call by recipients who did not intercept it. Breyer supports that publication under the case's specific facts.
- Recorded on
- Published here
More from this case
Read the full caseVolokh says suppressing publication would have been worse
“the alternative was to let the government suppress speech that’s often vital to public debate”Read statement
The 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
- Breyer backs protection for the intercepted-call broadcast only on its narrow facts
- First published
- Last updated
- Permalink
- https://disputeindex.com/events/7108-breyer-supports-protecting-the-broadcast-in-this-case
Last updated marks the most recent saved version of this published statement.
The Dispute Index. "Breyer backs protection for the intercepted-call broadcast only on its narrow facts". First published: 2026-10-28. Last updated: 2026-10-28. https://disputeindex.com/events/7108-breyer-supports-protecting-the-broadcast-in-this-case