Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?

High Court Trims Whistleblower Rights 718

iminplaya writes "In yet another blow against free speech rights, the Supreme Court decided that government employees who report wrongdoing do not enjoy 1st Amendment rights while on the job. From the article 'The Supreme Court scaled back protections for government workers who blow the whistle on official misconduct Tuesday, a 5-4 decision in which new Justice Samuel Alito cast the deciding vote [...] The ruling was perhaps the clearest sign yet of the Supreme Court's shift with the departure of moderate Justice Sandra Day O'Connor and the arrival of Alito. [...] Stephen Kohn, chairman of the National Whistleblower Center, said: "The ruling is a victory for every crooked politician in the United States."'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

High Court Trims Whistleblower Rights

Comments Filter:
  • you see? (Score:5, Funny)

    by mgabrys_sf ( 951552 ) on Wednesday May 31, 2006 @12:47AM (#15433131) Journal
    Democracy works!
  • by packetmon ( 977047 ) on Wednesday May 31, 2006 @12:50AM (#15433144) Homepage
    This country has been pushing out some of the strangest laws. Did the justices consider their ruling is likely to make someone think before reporting corruption. First it was the Bush administrations illegal wiretaps via the NSA, even though its not necessarily new news, now this. So what the current government has is a one two punch... If a whisteblower wants to report possible illegal activity, they may face the wraith of being tracked by the NSA, then the wrath of a justice system that's catering to criminals...
  • by stubear ( 130454 ) on Wednesday May 31, 2006 @12:51AM (#15433149)
    I'm guessing he wouldn't be all that crazy about being called TJ either.
  • Misconduct (Score:5, Funny)

    by Mantrid42 ( 972953 ) on Wednesday May 31, 2006 @12:53AM (#15433156)
    So... wait... if your superior is doing something wrong, you aren't allowed to talk about it? The Supreme Court just broke my mind.
  • by abscissa ( 136568 ) on Wednesday May 31, 2006 @12:58AM (#15433173)
    Are China and the US becoming more and more like eachother nowadays? It's like this country is moving to a pseudo-communist form of government :(

    Please, what a lot of fearmongering and nonsense. Communist governments spend vast sums of nonexistant money, they tend to create an elite "politburo" class of elite rich while everyone else remains poor, they begin wars and conquor countries to control resources they otherwise wouldn't have and couldn't afford, and they promote lies in schools [] that run contrary to science and evidence.

    Now tell me, HOW is America becoming to a pseudo-communist form of government??
  • by idonthack ( 883680 ) on Wednesday May 31, 2006 @01:36AM (#15433298)
    Agreed. We need a "+1, I Love You" moderation.
  • Do we get downmodded for that now?

    You obviously don't understand the full ramifications of the ruling, either. You now have the right to post truthful comments, but no protection against downmodding.

  • by Pvt_Waldo ( 459439 ) on Wednesday May 31, 2006 @02:23AM (#15433442)
    Irrespective of "summary is flamebait!" and other "this is NOT a limit on first amendment rights!" comments, it seems like this puts a bit of a chill on anyone who speaks out about things. It doesn't matter about truth per se, but more perception - what people are going to think versus what's fact.

    Of course maybe this is GW's way of getting set up to fire some ex Generals :^)
  • by Petersko ( 564140 ) on Wednesday May 31, 2006 @02:56AM (#15433527)
    "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." - The U.S. Constitution

    "Under the Senate bill, approved without objection by the House with no recorded vote, the "Respect for America's Fallen Heroes Act" would bar protests within 300 feet of the entrance of a cemetery and within 150 feet of a road into the cemetery from 60 minutes before to 60 minutes after a funeral. Those violating the act would face up to a $100,000 fine and up to a year in prison." - CNN []

    I'm not a fan of these jackasses who are making their point at military funerals. But isn't this type of thing exactly what the government is NOT supposed to be allowed to do?
  • by Yonder Way ( 603108 ) on Wednesday May 31, 2006 @06:39AM (#15434066)
    It's really disappointing that /. would choose to publish a story that sounds like it was published straight from a DNC press release, or from the pen of Michael Moore. Notice how all the quotes and opinions offered are from the dissenters. Other than a short snippet from the majority opinion out of SCOTUS, you're not hearing the other side of this at all.

    This is another example of those with a soap box using it to advance their personal political beliefs rather than giving you all sides of a controversy and trusting you to be smart enough to decide for yourself. (i.e. the old "when we want your opinion we'll give it to you" approach)

    Of course because I dared to critique a one-sided pro-liberal story here, I will be the first person modded -3 Troll in /. history if the mod squad figures out how to do it. I've got karma to burn; do your worst.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 31, 2006 @09:47AM (#15434874)
    >> I can and will only vote for candidates who are both pro life and pro second amendment.

    I'm pro life, now pass me my killin' stick!

Information is the inverse of entropy.