US top court hears whistle-blower case

[Judi Lynn]

US top court hears whistle-blower case
Reuters

Oct 12, 2005 — By James Vicini

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Supreme Court justices expressed reservations on Wednesday about giving free-speech protections to government whistle-blowers who try to expose possible misconduct at work.

The high court considered a California case involving a prosecutor who sued his former employer for retaliation after he reported suspected wrongdoing to senior officials in his department. The case could affect whistle-blowers and other government employees.

Los Angeles County Deputy District Attorney Richard Ceballos said he was demoted and denied a promotion for trying to expose a lie by a county sheriff's deputy in a search-warrant affidavit.

A U.S. appeals court ruled that Ceballos' action was protected by the First Amendment of the Constitution, as an instance of speaking up on an issue of public concern.
(snip/...)

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=1207036

[tk2kewl]

1. WTF?

"U.S. Supreme Court justices expressed reservations on Wednesday about giving free-speech protections to government whistle-blowers who try to expose possible misconduct at work."

The court doesn't get to "give" freedoms that are inalienable and are protected by the Bill of Rights. They only get to enforce them.

I can only say thank god O'Connor hasn't yet been replaced.

[SammyBlue]

2. Futurama line here fits:

Leela: "Give it up, Nixon. Free speech is one of the protections in the Earth Constitution."

Nixon: "Maybe so. But I know of a place where the Constitution doesn't mean squat!"

Cue picture of the SCOTUS Building.

[0rganism]

3. No big mystery which way the Roberts court will swing on this one

Put that constitution away. It's useless to you now, unless you've incorporated.