October Term 2010 · Docket 09-530

Can the government ask job applicants about medical treatment?

NASA seeks to enforce background checks that ask about medical counseling.

Official caption
NASA v. Nelson
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.

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

    General Katyal argued the lower court erred.

    He stated background checks are standard business practice.

    Justice Sotomayor questioned the limit on government inquiries.

    Justice Ginsburg focused on the specific contested questions.

    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

NASA wants to keep medical questions on job forms. Applicants want to stop these intrusive inquiries.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on October 5, 2010.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

NASA wants to ask about medical treatment.

Applicants want to stop these specific questions.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

NASA argues background checks are standard practice.

Applicants argue the government intrudes on private lives.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Sotomayor asked if government questions have limits.

Justice Ginsburg asked why the scope is so broad.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines the boundary of government privacy intrusion. It affects every citizen's right to personal medical information.

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