Abstract: This article discusses Justice Louis Brandeis's dissent in ♦Olmstead v. United States♦ from the Taft Court's decision to exempt government wiretapping from constitutional regulation. This is generally considered to be one of the great dissents for two reasons: (1) —its vindication on the issue of the constitutional status of wiretapping by the Warren Court in the famous Katz decision, and (2) its grounding of Fourth Amendment guarantees as rights of “privacy.” However, Professor Steiker argues that this dissent has an even stronger claim of greatness: Justice Brandeis's at once lyrical and indignant call for the repudiation of government lawbreaking in the pursuit of its own law enforcement goals, as such lawbreaking teaches contempt for the law.