Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/10pdf/09-530.pdf
Page Number: 29.0

Cite as:  562 U. S. ____ (2011) 

1 

SCALIA, J., concurring in judgment 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

_________________ 

No. 09–530 
_________________ 

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMIN- 

ISTRATION, ET AL., PETITIONERS v. 

ROBERT M. NELSON ET AL. 

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF

APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

[January 19, 2011] 

JUSTICE  SCALIA,  with  whom  JUSTICE  THOMAS  joins,

concurring in the judgment. 

I  agree  with  the  Court,  of  course,  that  background
checks  of  employees  of  government  contractors  do  not 
offend  the  Constitution.  But  rather  than  reach  this  con-
clusion  on  the  basis  of  the  never-explained  assumption 
that  the  Constitution  requires  courts  to  “balance”  the 
Government’s  interests  in  data  collection  against  its  con-
tractor employees’ interest in privacy, I reach it on simpler 
grounds.  Like  many  other  desirable  things  not  included 
in  the  Constitution,  “informational  privacy”  seems  like  a 
good idea—wherefore the People have enacted laws at the
federal level and in the states restricting the government’s 
collection and use of information.  But it is up to the Peo-
ple  to  enact  those  laws,  to  shape  them,  and,  when  they 
think  it  appropriate,  to  repeal  them.    A  federal  constitu-
tional right to “informational privacy” does not exist. 

Before  addressing  the  constitutional  issues,  however,  I 
must  observe  a  remarkable  and  telling  fact  about  this
case,  unique  in  my  tenure  on  this  Court:  Respondents’ 
brief, in arguing that the Federal Government violated the
Constitution,  does  not  once  identify  which  provision  of
the  Constitution  that  might  be.  The  Table of  Authorities 
contains  citations  of  cases  from  federal  and  state  courts,