Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/14pdf/13-7451_m64o.pdf
Page Number: 12.0

Cite as:  574 U. S. ____ (2015) 

9 

Opinion of GINSBURG, J. 

consideration of the language in which those purposes 
are  expressed,  and  of  the  circumstances  under  which
the language was employed.”2 

In  short,  although  dictionary  definitions  of  the  words 
“tangible”  and  “object”  bear  consideration,  they  are  not 
dispositive of the meaning of “tangible object” in §1519.

Supporting  a  reading  of  “tangible  object,”  as  used  in 
§1519,  in  accord  with  dictionary  definitions,  the  Govern-
ment  points  to  the  appearance  of  that  term  in  Federal 
Rule  of  Criminal  Procedure  16.  That  Rule  requires  the
prosecution  to  grant  a  defendant’s  request  to  inspect 
“tangible  objects”  within  the  Government’s  control  that 
have  utility  for  the  defense.  See  Fed.  Rule  Crim.  Proc. 
16(a)(1)(E).

Rule  16’s  reference  to “tangible  objects”  has  been  inter-
preted to include any physical evidence.  See 5 W. LaFave, 
J. Israel, N. King, & O. Kerr, Criminal Procedure §20.3(g),
pp. 405–406, and n. 120 (3d ed. 2007).  Rule 16 is a discov-
ery rule designed to protect defendants by compelling the
prosecution  to  turn  over  to  the  defense  evidence  material 
to the charges at issue.  In that context, a comprehensive
construction  of  “tangible  objects”  is  fitting.    In  contrast, 
§1519  is  a  penal  provision  that  refers  to  “tangible  object” 
not  in  relation  to  a  request  for  information  relevant  to  a
specific court proceeding, but rather in relation to federal 
investigations  or  proceedings  of  every  kind,  including 
those not yet begun.3  See Commissioner v. National Car-
bide  Corp.,  167  F. 2d  304,  306  (CA2  1948)  (Hand,  J.) 
—————— 

2 The dissent assiduously ignores all this, post, at 11–12, in insisting
that  Congress  wrote  §1519  to  cover,  along  with  shredded  corporate 
documents, red grouper slightly smaller than the legal limit. 

3 For  the  same  reason,  we  do  not  think  the  meaning  of  “tangible  ob-
jects”  (or  “tangible  things,”  see  Fed.  Rule  Civ.  Proc.  26(b))  in  other 
discovery prescriptions cited by the Government leads to the conclusion 
that  “tangible  object”  in  §1519  encompasses  any  and  all  physical
evidence existing on land or in the sea.