- Posted January 23, 2015
- Tweet This | Share on Facebook
SUPREME COURT NOTEBOOK
Court rules in favor of fired whistleblower
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that a former air marshal who was fired after leaking plans to the media about security cutbacks can seek whistleblower protection.
By a 7-2 vote, the justices said Robert MacLean did not violate federal law when he revealed that the Transportation Security Administration planned to save money by cutting back on overnight trips for undercover air marshals.
MacLean leaked the information in 2003 to an MSNBC reporter after supervisors ignored his safety concerns. His disclosure triggered outrage in Congress, and the Department of Homeland Security quickly reversed the policy, calling it a mistake. But the TSA fired McLean three years later after it discovered he was the leaker.
A federal appeals court sided with MacLean, but the Obama administration appealed. The government argued that whistleblower laws contain a major exception - they do not protect employees who reveal information that is "prohibited by law" or by an executive order. Government lawyers pointed to TSA regulations that prohibit employees from disclosing "sensitive security information," including any information relating to air marshal deployments.
Chief Justice John Roberts said in his opinion for the court that nothing in federal law prohibits MacLean from doing what he did. The government has raised legitimate security concerns, Roberts said, but they must be addressed by the president through an executive order or Congress by changing the law. "Although Congress and the president each has the power to address the government's concerns, neither has done so. It is not our role to do so for them," he wrote.
Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Anthony Kennedy dissented.
MacLean also had argued that the information about cutting overnight trips wasn't really sensitive because it had been sent as a text to his cell phone without using more secure methods.
The government warned that allowing MacLean to gain whistleblower status would only encourage other federal employees to divulge secret information, posing a future threat to public safety. Roberts repeated what several justices said during arguments in November - that if the safety issue were grave enough, the president could simply sign an executive order prohibiting federal workers from revealing such sensitive data.
The case is Department of Homeland Security v. MacLean, 13-894.
Published: Fri, Jan 23, 2015
headlines Oakland County
- Leading role: Firm’s new CEO ‘humbled by trust placed in me’
- Nessel receives Alzheimer’s Association Michigan Chapter Excellence in Leadership Award
- Consumer alerts reissued following latest round of storms
- Prosecutor announces winners of 2024 ‘Knocking Violence Out of My School’ video competition
- Convening event strengthens network of court DEI professionals
headlines National
- Civil legal aid lawyers are often the last line of defense. Why are there so few of them?
- Bankruptcy law firm files for Chapter 11 after losing advertising dispute
- Dentons and Boies Schiller face $300M racketeering suit after client loses international arbitration
- Mother’s Day and the changing face of family dynamics and custody arrangements
- Federal judge reprimanded for handcuffing teen spectator in scared-straight approach
- Lawyer whose firm sued Boeing finds emergency slide that fell from company’s plane near his home