US SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

NASA v. Nelson - 09-530 (2011)

• Syllabus
• Opinion (Justice Kagan)
• Concurrence (Justice Scalia)
• Concurrence (Justice Scalia)
• Concurrence (Justice Thomas)
• Concurrence (Justice Thomas)

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMIN- ISTRATION, et al., PETITIONERS v. ROBERT M. NELSON et al:chanrobles.com-red

On writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit

[January 19, 2011]

Justice Thomas, concurring in the judgment:chanrobles.com-red

I agree with Justice Scalia that the Constitution does not protect a right to informational privacy. Ante, at 1 (opinion concurring in judgment). No provision in the Constitution mentions such a right. Cf. Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U. S. 558, 605–606 (2003) (Thomas, J., dissenting) (“I can find neither in the Bill of Rights nor any other part of the Constitution a general right of privacy … ” (internal quotation marks and brackets omitted)). And the notion that the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment is a wellspring of unenumerated rights against the Federal Government “strains credulity for even the most casual user of words.” McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U. S. ___, ___ (2010) (Thomas, J., concurring in part and concurring in judgment) (slip op., at 7).