Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/10pdf/09-530.pdf
Page Number: 2.0

2 

NASA v. NELSON 

Syllabus 

have “adverse information” concerning a variety of other matters.  All 
SF–85  and  Form  42  responses  are  subject  to  the  protections  of  the
Privacy Act.

With  the  deadline  for  completing  the  NACI  process  drawing  near, 
respondents  brought  suit,  claiming,  as  relevant  here,  that  the  back-
ground-check process violates a constitutional right to informational
privacy.    The  District  Court  declined  to  issue  a  preliminary  injunc-
tion,  but  the  Ninth  Circuit  reversed.    It  held  that  SF–85’s  inquiries
into recent drug involvement furthered the Government’s interest in 
combating illegal-drug use, but that the drug “treatment or counsel-
ing” question furthered no legitimate interest and was thus likely to 
be  held  unconstitutional.    It  also  held  that  Form  42’s  open-ended 
questions were not narrowly tailored to meet the Government’s inter-
ests  in  verifying  contractors’  identities  and  ensuring  JPL’s  security, 
and  thus  also  likely  violated  respondents’  informational-privacy 
rights. 

Held: 

1. In  two  cases  decided  over  30  years  ago,  this  Court  referred 
broadly to a constitutional privacy “interest in avoiding disclosure of 
personal matters.”  Whalen v. Roe, 429 U. S. 589, 599–600; Nixon v. 
Administrator of General Services, 433 U. S. 425, 457.  In Whalen, the 
Court upheld a New York law permitting the collection of names and
addresses  of  persons  prescribed  dangerous  drugs,  finding  that  the 
statute’s “security provisions,” which protected against “public disclo-
sure” of patient information, 462 U. S., at 600–601, were sufficient to
protect a privacy interest “arguably . . . root[ed] in the Constitution,” 
id.,  at  605.  In  Nixon,  the  Court  upheld  a  law  requiring  the  former 
President to turn over his presidential papers and tape recordings for 
archival review and screening, concluding that the federal Act at is-
sue,  like  the  statute  in  Whalen,  had  protections  against  “undue  dis-
semination of private materials.”  433 U. S, at 458.  Since Nixon, the 
Court has said little else on the subject of a constitutional right to in-
formational privacy.  Pp. 8–10.

2. Assuming,  without  deciding,  that  the  Government’s  challenged
inquiries  implicate  a  privacy  interest  of  constitutional  significance, 
that  interest,  whatever  its  scope,  does  not  prevent  the  Government 
from asking reasonable questions of  the sort included on SF–85 and 
Form  42  in  an  employment  background  investigation  that  is  subject
to the Privacy Act’s safeguards against public disclosure.  Pp. 10–24. 

(a) The forms are reasonable in light of the Government interests 

at stake.  Pp. 11–19. 

(1) Judicial review of the forms must take into account the con-
text in which the Government’s challenged inquiries arise.  When the 
Government  acts  in  its  capacity  “as  proprietor”  and  manager  of  its