In the case of Warren Christopher, Former Secretary of State, et al. v. Jennifer K. Harbury (2001), Jennifer Harbury sued several U.S officials including former Secretary of State Warren Christopher for allegedly misleading her about the fate and whereabouts of her husband Efrain Bamaca-Velasquez who was a Guatemalan rebel commander captured by the Guatemalan army in 1992 and later killed while in custody. She claimed that these officials violated her constitutional right to access courts by providing false information which delayed her from filing a lawsuit regarding his torture and death on time. The Supreme Court ruled against Harbury stating that she failed to identify an underlying cause of action for which access could have been denied or obstructed due to defendants' deception. The court also held that even if there were any such claim it would be more appropriate under tort law rather than constitutional law as alleged by Ms.Harbury.

In the dissenting opinion for Warren Christopher, Former Secretary of State, et al. v. Jennifer K. Harbury (2001), Justice Stevens argued that the majority's decision to dismiss Harbury's claim was premature and unjustified by existing law or precedent. He contended that her right to access courts had been violated because she was intentionally misled about her husband’s status by government officials, preventing her from seeking relief in a timely manner while he was still alive. Furthermore, he disagreed with the majority's view on Bivens actions - lawsuits brought directly under the U.S Constitution against federal officers who violate constitutional rights - stating it should be applicable here as well since there is no alternative remedy available for such deception by government officials.