Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/19-783_k53l.pdf
Page Number: 13

Cite as:  593 U. S. ____ (2021) 

9 

Opinion of the Court 

work to do, the Government contends, the rule against su-
perfluity means that its interpretation wins.  See Republic 
of Sudan v. Harrison, 587 U. S. ___, ___ (2019) (slip op., at 
10).

But the canon does not help the Government because Van
Buren’s reading does not render “so” superfluous.  As Van 
Buren points out, without “so,” the statute would allow in-
dividuals to use their right to obtain information in nondig-
ital form as a defense to CFAA liability.  Consider, for ex-
ample,  a  person  who  downloads  restricted  personnel  files
he is not entitled to obtain by using his computer.  Such a 
person could argue that he was “entitled to obtain” the in-
formation  if  he  had  the  right  to  access  personnel  files 
through another method (e.g., by requesting hard copies of
the files from human resources).  With “so,” the CFAA fore-
closes that theory of defense.  The statute is concerned with 
what a person does on a computer; it does not excuse hack-
ing into an electronic personnel file if the hacker could have
walked down the hall to pick up a physical copy.

This  clarification  is  significant  because  it  underscores 
that one kind of entitlement to information counts: the right
to  access  the  information  by  using  a  computer.  That  can 
expand liability, as the above example shows.  But it nar-
rows liability too.  Without the word “so,” the statute could 
be read to incorporate all kinds of limitations on one’s enti-
tlement to information.  The dissent’s take on the statute 
illustrates why. 

3 
While the dissent accepts Van Buren’s definition of “so,”
it  would  arrive  at  the  Government’s  result  by  way  of  the 
word “entitled.”  One is “entitled” to do something, the dis-
sent  contends,  only  when  “ ‘proper  grounds’ ”  are  in  place. 
Post, at 3 (opinion of THOMAS, J.) (quoting Black’s Law Dic-
tionary, at 477).  Deciding whether a person was “entitled”