Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/10pdf/09-530.pdf
Page Number: 40.0

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

1 

THOMAS, 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 THOMAS, concurring in the judgment. 
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., dissent-
ing) (“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.  Chi-
cago, 561 U. S. ___, ___ (2010) (THOMAS, J., concurring in
part and concurring in judgment) (slip op., at 7).