Case Citation
Legal Case Name

Boehner, John A. v. McDermott, James A. Case Brief

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit2007Docket #546850
484 F.3d 573 376 U.S. App. D.C. 75 2007 WL 1246438 Constitutional Law Federal Courts

Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs

Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.

Adaptive Case Views

Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.

Exam-Ready IRAC Format

We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.

Complex Cases, Clarified

We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.

Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis

General Brief
3 min read

tl;dr: A congressman on the House Ethics Committee disclosed an illegally recorded tape to the press. The court held his special duty of confidentiality as a committee member stripped him of First Amendment protection, making him liable under a federal wiretapping statute.

Legal Significance: Establishes that a public official’s pre-existing duty of confidentiality, arising from a position of trust, can override First Amendment protections against liability for disclosing truthful information of public concern that was illegally obtained by a third party.

Boehner, John A. v. McDermott, James A. Law School Study Guide

Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.

Case Facts & Court Holding

Key Facts & Case Background

Representative James McDermott, the ranking Democrat on the House Ethics Committee, received a tape recording of an illegally intercepted conference call involving Representative John Boehner. The call concerned the ongoing ethics investigation of then-Speaker Newt Gingrich. The tape was delivered by the couple who illegally recorded it, along with a letter explaining its origin. Knowing the tape was the product of an illegal wiretap, McDermott disclosed its contents to reporters from The New York Times and The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, resulting in front-page articles. Boehner sued McDermott for violating 18 U.S.C. § 2511(1)(c), which creates civil liability for intentionally disclosing the contents of an illegally intercepted communication. At the time, McDermott was subject to House Ethics Committee Rule 9, which prohibited members from disclosing “any evidence relating to an investigation” without committee authorization. The Ethics Committee later issued a report concluding that McDermott’s disclosure was “inconsistent with the spirit of the applicable rules.”

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: Does the First Amendment protect a member of the House Ethics Committee from civil liability under 18 U.S.C. § 2511(1)(c) for disclosing an illegally intercepted communication to the media, when House rules impose a duty of confidentiality on him?

No. The court affirmed the judgment against McDermott. It held that his Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Dui

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

IRAC Legal Analysis

Premium Feature Unlock

Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades

IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.

Legal Issue

Does the First Amendment protect a member of the House Ethics Committee from civil liability under 18 U.S.C. § 2511(1)(c) for disclosing an illegally intercepted communication to the media, when House rules impose a duty of confidentiality on him?

Conclusion

This case establishes a significant limitation on the *Bartnicki* principle, holding that Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse

Legal Rule

A public official who accepts a position of trust that includes a Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaeca

Legal Analysis

The court assumed arguendo that McDermott lawfully obtained the tape, a key Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • A government official in a position of trust has a special
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

Where you see wrong or inequality or injustice, speak out, because this is your country. This is your democracy. Make it. Protect it. Pass it on.

✨ Enjoy an ad-free experience with LSD+