The Supreme Court heard an attorney-client privilege case Monday as a lawsuit attempted to draw the lines on communications that may or may not contain privileged information.
The eventual ruling could prove to be significant in how the legal purpose of potentially privileged communication is defined in U.S. courts.
The case did not reveal the parties in the sealed case, although The Hill reported public filings point to a tax firm refusal to produce documents in a criminal tax probe, and the client is reportedly an "early promoter of bitcoin."
Daniel Levin, arguing for an unnamed firm, sought a legal standard of a "significant" legal purpose if privileged and non-privileged information could not be separated, while government attorney Masha Hansford wants a "primary-purpose" test for analyzing the privilege of the information.
"Taken seriously, that test requires parties and courts to disentangle competing purposes and to identify the single most important one," Levin argued. "That is an inherently impossible exercise."
Levin argued, without a "significant" standard, attorneys would be "chilled" in communicating with clients.
Related Stories:
Eric Mack ✉
Eric Mack has been a writer and editor at Newsmax since 2016. He is a 1998 Syracuse University journalism graduate and a New York Press Association award-winning writer.
© 2026 Newsmax. All rights reserved.