Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/19pdf/19-631_2d93.pdf
Page Number: 3

Cite as:  591 U. S. ____ (2020) 

3 

Syllabus 

speech  are  subject  to  strict  scrutiny,  that  the  Telephone  Consumer
Protection Act’s rule against cellphone robocalls is a content-based re-
striction, and that this rule fails strict scrutiny and therefore cannot 
be constitutionally enforced.  Pp. 1–4. 

KAVANAUGH,  J.,  announced  the  judgment  of  the  Court  and  delivered 
an opinion, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and ALITO, J., joined, and in which 
THOMAS, J., joined as to Parts I and II.  SOTOMAYOR, J., filed an opinion 
concurring in the judgment.  BREYER, J., filed an opinion concurring in 
the  judgment  with  respect  to  severability  and  dissenting  in  part,  in 
which GINSBURG and KAGAN, JJ., joined.  GORSUCH, J., filed an opinion 
concurring  in  the  judgment  in  part  and  dissenting  in  part,  in  which 
THOMAS, J., joined as to Part II.