[Vision2020] Whistle-blower decision

[lfalen]

>From a constitutional or individual rights point of view, neither decision makes any sense.
Roger
-----Original message-----
From: "Bruce and Jean Livingston" jeanlivingston at turbonet.com
Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2006 14:55:21 -0700
To: "lfalen" lfalen at turbonet.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Whistle-blower decision

> I couldn't agree more with you, Roger, and it was a 5-4 decision, Garcetti v. Ceballos.  The justices who ruled against the whistle blower were:  Justice Kennedy, who authored the opinion, along with Chief Justice Roberts, and Justices Scalia, Thomas and Alito.  http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/05pdf/04-473.pdf
> 
> This is bad as the decision last year that allowed government to condemn private property as an alleged "public use" when condemned land was to be used by other private parties for their own economic developments (as opposed to the traditional eminent domain categories of "public use" such as for highways, etc.).  See Kelo v. New London, authored by Justice Stevens and joined by Justices Kennedy, Souter, Breyer and Ginsburg.    http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/23jun20051201/www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/04pdf/04-108.pdf
> 
> So between those two opinions, I can be mad at everyone on the court.
> 
> Bruce Livingston
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "lfalen" <lfalen at turbonet.com>
> To: <vision2020 at moscow.com>
> Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2006 12:54 PM
> Subject: [Vision2020] Whistle-blower decision
> 
> 
> > Did anyone see the article on the Supreme Courts Whistle-blower decision. There was an editorial on ti in last nights DN on it
> > This is a very bad decision. In essence it says a government employee may be disciplined for blowing the whistle on government misconduct. This will really put a damper on any person of integrity exposing government misconduct. I think this was a 5 to 3 decision. I can'tt believe any justice would make this kind of a ruling. The only time a whistle-blower should be punished is if the charges are proven to be false. 
> > 
> > Roger
> > 
> > _____________________________________________________
> > List services made available by First Step Internet, 
> > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
> >               http://www.fsr.net                       
> >          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> > ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
> >
>