Top court considers whistleblower lawsuit

[sabra]

http://www.sanluisobispo.com/mld/sanluisobispo/news/politics/12883135.htm

Top court considers whistleblower lawsuit


Associated Press


WASHINGTON - The Bush administration pressed the Supreme Court on Wednesday for a ruling that would make it harder for government whistleblowers to win lawsuits claiming retaliation.

Justices seemed conflicted on where to draw the line in protecting the First Amendment speech rights of more than 20 million public employees.

In a lively hour-long session, justices talked about the importance of preserving the privacy of some government work, like the high court's own deliberations. Though there were also concerns about the concealment of government misconduct.

"We live in a world where people are leaking things all the time," said Justice Stephen Breyer, adding that he was uncomfortable giving government employees blanket protection for things they say.

[hang a left]

1. This is an important case.

And I think the outcome will give us a sneak preview on how Sibel Edmond's case will end up going down.

[hootinholler]

5. Yes it is! Rec'd.

They are trying to set a precedent that can be leveraged in SIbel's case.

Very important case: Garcetti v. Ceballos.

-Hoot

edit to add link.

[emad]

2. BushCo running shit scared.

Just watch them try to sweat it out.

[napi21]

3. What's the average time the Scotus's take before they issue

the opinion on cases they've heard?

The reason I'm asking is because O'Connor is still there and hearing all the arguments now. If the decision is not made before she leaves, there are two options. The opinion will be issued by an 8 person court, or the court will decide to rehear the arguments after the new justice takes her seat.

I was concerned about the issue last week about parental notification, but I'm just as concerned about this one today!

[Just Me]

4. If there is evidence that the government is concealing misconduct,....

,...that is where the line should be drawn for absolute protection (and that line is way beyond what the BFEE and neoCONsters want). Frankly, if there is evidence of any government misconduct revealed by the whistle-blower, automatic protection should be extended.

Naturally, lies or bogus assertions or fraud certainly earns no protection. That's just common sense.