Bush’s Supreme Court Punishes Whistleblowers
Here’s a pretty damned important ruling from the right-wing extremist court that voters asked for in the 2004 election :
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.In a victory for the Bush administration, justices said the 20 million public employees do not have free-speech protections for what they say as part of their jobs.
Critics predicted the impact would be sweeping, from silencing police officers who fear retribution for reporting department corruption, to subduing federal employees who want to reveal problems with government hurricane preparedness or terrorist-related security.
Like the article says, “in a victory for the Bush administration”…..
13 comments »
Copy link for RSS feed for comments on this post
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
This is certainly one of the important reasons why more people should vote in presidential elections, presidents appoint people to the Supreme Court. Having stacked the Supreme Court in his favor Bush covers all his bases with his power grabs, the same power grabs that Congress did nothing about though it is their responsibility to do so.
Now Congress whines and howls about the raid on Jefferson the implications being that they should be above the law, the same laws that govern common citizens. Now the Supreme Court says common citizens have even less rights. Where is the balance of power? The answer is clear the balance of power is with Bush as he seeks to protect himself from investigation. This will be the legacy of Bush and one that will live on long after he is gone from the oval office so that the republicans can retain their majority in all branches of government. The damage done by a presidency that is more concerned with power rather than proper and fair governing is hard to estimate as the republican stranglehold on America becomes more entrenched with each passing day.
Comment by rob payne — May 31, 2006 @ 12:10 am
I strongly believe that the laws would stay the same for common citizens and anyone else. The balance of power is needed here.
Comment by Bobby — May 31, 2006 @ 5:24 am
I’m sorry, but all this talk about the so called rights of ‘journalists’, a profession by the way that exists for no other reason than to tell ‘Americans’ inconvenient ‘facts’ about their glorious leader, has me riled up in a frothing patriotic rage.
Seriously, could you islamosexuals explain to me why, exactly, you hate American Freedom, for which so many patriots died to protect us from? Is it because of your homosexual parenting? Your terror loving abortioning public schools? Your treasonous regard for the so called constitution?
Look guys, it’s called the Bill of Rights, not the Bill of Wrongs. Reporting on what the President does during the war on terror, the most horrible and dangerous time in American history ever, is w-r-o-n-g. Plain and simple. And if you think otherwise, than you can go back to England.
FREEDOM!
(And please, speak directly into my lapel. Wha…? Why no, it doesn’t mean anything. You must hate America.)
Comment by Ross A Lincoln — May 31, 2006 @ 7:17 am
Ross, Baby, come back to us! Earth to Ross. Earth to Ross!
Did you skip your medication, or overdose?
I hope you were making a joke, because if you weren’t, then Fascism is on the rise, and that’s REALLY scary!
Comment by jojo — May 31, 2006 @ 8:28 am
Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!
Comment by Patrick Henry — May 31, 2006 @ 9:49 am
One scary thing is that it’s getting harder and harder to tell when comments like Ross’s are over-the-top jokes and not intended to be taken seriously.
A few months ago, I got pretty upset at a family gathering when my brother, father, and stepfather (all very intelligent people) were discussing the then recent Alito hearings. They all seemed to think that he was a reasonable guy and that the questioning Senators were all grandstanding idiots. I just had to shake my head. They seemed to equate a reasonable tone of voice with a reasonable mind.
Once again, I’m turning out have been right all along.
Comment by dAVE — May 31, 2006 @ 9:54 am
“For Brutus is an honorable man,
So are they all, all honorable men”
It’s very easy to look like reasonable posing with your wife and children in front of Senate committee. You need to be paying attention to peer beneath the veneer and see what sort of man he would be on the court. Unfortunately most Americans just look at the facade and say, “He seems a decent fellow, why don’t they stop harassing him?” rather than actually looking at his record and seeing how horrible he would be for American democracy.
Comment by Marcus — May 31, 2006 @ 12:37 pm
Ross = Steven Colbert
At least its the same brand of humor. Stealing elections has consequences. Now, our citizens are paying for them. Disenfranchisement, redistricting, campaign finance and general voting issues are non-partisan in the sense that they would help voters make informed decisions. Which seems to be something nobody in Washington really wants.
Comment by Parklife — May 31, 2006 @ 3:07 pm
I know what you mean, but for my ego’s sake, I’m pretending you meant this literally and I’m going to feel good.
Election stealing does, indeed have dire consequences, but what terrifies me more is the fact that even without the haze of illegitimacy that clouds the last 2 presidential elections, there are still millions of people who proudly voted for an administration that is hell bent on bringing 229 years of American legal tradition and liberties to an inglorious end.
What’s worse is that they’re proud of it, and honestly seem to think that these policies are somehow living up to the founding father’s intentions. And of course, once they’ve succeeded in controlling how history is taught, they’ll be right.
Comment by ROss Lincoln — May 31, 2006 @ 3:29 pm
Well, the Founding Fathers’ intentions weren’t exactly for everyone to have equal voice in the government. They’re just trying to get back to: only white male landowners get to vote, blacks are 3/5th of a person, etc.
Hell, with the Electoral College, you do not have a Constitutional right to vote for President. You have the right to vote for a slate of Electors who are in no way legally bound to vote for your choice.
Next on the list - Senators are appointed by the legislatures of each state, as the Founding Fathers intended.
Comment by dAVE — May 31, 2006 @ 4:15 pm
OH WELL:
If one READS the 14th Amendment, (it’s short and easy to read, try it) one finds that ALL federal employees are FEDERAL CITIZENS. (effectively citizens of D.C.) As such, their rights are subject to the will of Congress (section 5) (DC, ten square miles, Article 1 section 8 clause 17, U.S. CONSTITUTION, is a Legislative Democracy under the TOTAL rule of Congress and NOT a Constitutional Republic, like the 50 states, under the CONSTITUTION) (Brazo v Porto Rico) If Congress limits a Federal Citizens’ speach The Supreme Court MUST uphold no matter who sits on the Bench.
Comment by Mike Meyer — May 31, 2006 @ 6:39 pm
Everyone drink the kool-aid… d-r-i-n-k t-h-e k-o-o-l–a-i-d
Brought to you the Committee to Re-Elect the President
Comment by patrick — May 31, 2006 @ 11:22 pm
News likes this has me missin’ Bill Clinton.
Comment by Joe — June 6, 2006 @ 1:56 pm