Ginsburg filed a dissent from the Court's denial of certiorari. The plaintiffs had been ejected by volunteers, acting at the behest of the government, from a public speech by President George W. Bush because of an anti-war bumper sticker on the plaintiffs' car. The lower court ruled that the volunteers were entitled to qualified immunity because "no specific [judicial] authority" had given instructions on how to address the specific issue. Ginsburg wrote that the ejection was unreasonable and no "specific authority" should have been needed despite the novel facts of the case, because the Court's jurisprudence was quite clear that a benefit (access to the speech) could not be withheld on the basis of protected speech (the political bumper sticker). Ginsburg thought the volunteer status of the respondents in this appeal may have had some bearing on the Court's decision not to review the case, because the Volunteer Protection Act of 1997 may have shielded them from suit (although that was not the basis of the lower court's ruling). The lawsuit remained pending below against the government officials responsible for the plaintiffs' removal.
Ginsburg's opinion for the Court ruled that 18 U.S.C.§ 924(c), which required a minimum five-year prison sentence for the involvement of a deadly weapon in federal drug trafficking or violent offenses, was to be imposed in addition to any other mandatory sentence given for another crime, including the underlying offense. The only exception to the five-year addition applied only when another provision required a longer mandatory term for conduct violating §924(c) specifically, rather than a mandatory sentence for another crime as the defendants had unsuccessfully argued.