Skip to comments.
Justices, 5-4, Limit Whistleblower Suits (Alito Breaks Tie, Sides With Conservatives)
New York Times ^
| May 30, 2006
Posted on 05/30/2006 8:18:39 AM PDT by RWR8189
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 141-159 next last
1
posted on
05/30/2006 8:18:43 AM PDT
by
RWR8189
To: RWR8189
To: RWR8189
That should include retired Generals...........
3
posted on
05/30/2006 8:21:25 AM PDT
by
yoe
To: yoe
This might also have covered the FBI agents who had been trying to get the agency to look into some of the precursors to 9/11. Are you sure stifling whistleblowers is the way you want government to govern? Not me.
4
posted on
05/30/2006 8:26:46 AM PDT
by
gcruse
(http://gcruse.typepad.com)
To: RWR8189
Stand by for the "chilling effect" predictions.
5
posted on
05/30/2006 8:28:02 AM PDT
by
rhombus
To: RWR8189
I completely understand the mentality behind this: CYA for the gubmint, but am I off by saying this is a violation of 1st Amendment freedoms? Shouldn't this be covered in gov't employment policy instead of federal code?
/donsFlameproofSuit
6
posted on
05/30/2006 8:28:28 AM PDT
by
rarestia
("One man with a gun can control 100 without one." - Lenin / Molwn Labe!)
To: RWR8189
I don't know, but I'm presuming (and asking):
Roberts
Scalia
Thomas
Alito
???
7
posted on
05/30/2006 8:29:10 AM PDT
by
Petronski
(I just love that woman.)
To: Petronski
And it says Kennedy wrote the opinion for the majority.
8
posted on
05/30/2006 8:30:03 AM PDT
by
RWR8189
(George Allen for President)
To: Petronski
Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, writing for the court's majority, said the First Amendment does not protect "every statement a public employee makes in the course of doing his or her job."
9
posted on
05/30/2006 8:30:16 AM PDT
by
rhombus
To: rhombus
No need to predict anything. How did we find out about the Clintons going through FBI records looking for dirt? That's right. Whistleblower. The First Felons would have loved this decision.
10
posted on
05/30/2006 8:30:17 AM PDT
by
gcruse
(http://gcruse.typepad.com)
To: Petronski
Kennedy wrote for the Majority, presumably:
Roberts
Kennedy
Scalia
Thomas
Alito
11
posted on
05/30/2006 8:31:03 AM PDT
by
Petronski
(I just love that woman.)
To: RWR8189
Toooooo bad the leaking elected Congress creatures are not required to "whistleblow" by the same rules.
To: RWR8189; rhombus
Thanks. It was right in front of me.
Maxwell House don't fail me now!
13
posted on
05/30/2006 8:32:30 AM PDT
by
Petronski
(I just love that woman.)
To: Petronski
KENNEDY, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS,
C. J., and SCALIA, THOMAS, and ALITO, JJ., joined. STEVENS, J., filed a dissenting opinion. SOUTER, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which STEVENS and GINSBURG, JJ., joined. BREYER, J., filed a dissenting opinion.
14
posted on
05/30/2006 8:34:41 AM PDT
by
Petronski
(I just love that woman.)
To: Petronski
No prob. I was surprised at the Kennedy vote.
15
posted on
05/30/2006 8:34:55 AM PDT
by
rhombus
To: RWR8189
Notice how the slimes gets O'Connor's name in the article.... Still crying a river.
16
posted on
05/30/2006 8:35:49 AM PDT
by
b4its2late
(Men are from earth. Women are from earth. Hillary's from hell. Deal with it.)
To: gcruse
Did the whistelbowers you cited in the FBI records case sue the "First Felons"?
17
posted on
05/30/2006 8:36:05 AM PDT
by
rhombus
To: rhombus
Roberts and Alito must have done a good job persuading Kennedy. Hopefully that will happen more often.
Glad to see limits on those "whistleblowers" divulging our national security secrets and undermining the war on terror.
BTTT!
18
posted on
05/30/2006 8:37:33 AM PDT
by
blitzgig
To: Petronski
Held: When public employees make statements pursuant to their official duties, they are not speaking as citizens for First Amendment purposes, and the Constitution does not insulate their communications from employer discipline. Pp. 514.
Opinion available here (pdf)
19
posted on
05/30/2006 8:37:40 AM PDT
by
Petronski
(I just love that woman.)
To: rhombus
Ah, it's in the suing. You're right. This is a tangent from the real problem of opaque governing.
20
posted on
05/30/2006 8:39:40 AM PDT
by
gcruse
(http://gcruse.typepad.com)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 141-159 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson