October Term 2000 · Docket 99-1687

Does the First Amendment protect the publication of illegally intercepted private conversations?

the sides that brought the case seek damages for the broadcast of their private conversation. the opposing sides claim the First Amendment shields their publication of that information.

Official caption
Bartnicki v. Vopper
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  2. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    the sides that brought the case emphasize the vital interest in excluding unwanted intruders from private activities.

    the opposing sides assert that the First Amendment protects the publication of the intercepted conversation.

    The Court examines whether the source of the information changes the constitutional analysis.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

This case tests whether the First Amendment protects the publication of private conversations intercepted by a third party without the speakers' consent.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on December 5, 2000.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

the sides that brought the case want a damages award for the broadcast of their private conversation.

the opposing sides want dismissal of the suit based on First Amendment protection.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

the sides that brought the case argue the law must protect individuals from unwanted intrusions into private activities.

the opposing sides argue the First Amendment protects the publication of information of public concern.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Does the First Amendment bar liability for publishing illegally intercepted private conversations?

Does the source of the information affect the publisher's constitutional protection?

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

The outcome defines the boundary between privacy rights and free speech. It determines whether publishers face liability for broadcasting private conversations. This affects how media organizations report sensitive information. It shapes the legal risk for publishing intercepted communications.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON