Nardone v. United States

Background

Two people were tried and convicted for smuggling alcohol, hiding it, and conspiring to do so. Federal agents had tapped telephone wires and overheard their interstate calls. Over the defendants’ objections, agents testified at trial about the content of those intercepted calls. The trial court and the federal appeals court found the tapped conversations important and upheld the convictions.

Reasoning

The Court addressed whether Section 605 of the Communications Act bars intercepting and testifying about telephone messages. Section 605 says “no person” may intercept or divulge the contents of wire communications not authorized by the sender. The majority read that language literally and concluded it covers everyone, including federal officers, so testimony revealing intercepted calls is forbidden. The government argued earlier court decisions and that Congress knew of wiretapping practice, but the majority said the statute’s plain text controls. The Court reversed the convictions and sent the case back for further proceedings consistent with its ruling.

Real world impact

The decision prevents the government from using evidence that federal agents obtain by tapping telephones in similar circumstances under §605. Defendants whose convictions relied on tapped calls may get new trials or reversed convictions. The Court noted that Congress could change the rule by passing new legislation, since the ruling rests on the statute’s wording.

Dissents or concurrances

A dissent argued the word “person” should not include federal officers fighting crime and warned the ruling will hinder law enforcement and let criminals communicate without fear of interception. Justice Sutherland would have affirmed the convictions.