In the case of Robert Shaw, et al. v. Kevin Murphy in 2000, the U.S Supreme Court addressed whether a prisoner's First Amendment rights were violated when he was disciplined for giving legal advice to another inmate about excessive force claims against prison guards. Kevin Murphy, an inmate and jailhouse lawyer at Montana State Prison, had written a letter advising another prisoner on how to proceed with his complaint regarding alleged mistreatment by guards. The prison officials punished him for this action citing it as "conduct which disrupts or interferes with security." Murphy sued claiming that his First Amendment rights were violated. The District Court ruled in favor of the prison officials but was reversed by Ninth Circuit Appeals court stating that prisoners have protected speech under First Amendment when they give legal assistance to other inmates concerning complaints about conditions of confinement. However, upon reaching the Supreme Court level, it held unanimously (9-0) that there is no special protection under First Amendment for such speech inside prisons if it violates legitimate penological objectives like maintaining order and discipline within facilities. Therefore ruling in favor of Shaw and reversing Ninth Circuit’s decision.

In the dissenting opinion for Robert Shaw, et al. v. Kevin Murphy, Justice Ginsburg argued that prison officials should not have unfettered discretion to punish inmates for their speech without any First Amendment scrutiny. She emphasized that while maintaining order and security in prisons is crucial, it does not justify a blanket ban on inmate correspondence offering legal advice. The majority's decision could potentially lead to arbitrary enforcement by prison officials who may be motivated by an intent to suppress particular viewpoints or silence certain individuals rather than genuine concerns about safety or discipline within the facility. Therefore, she believed that courts should apply a more rigorous standard of review when evaluating restrictions on prisoners' free speech rights.