[SSRI-Research] Sureme Court Strikes Blow Against Public Accountability

[Guest guest]

SSRI-Research@

Thu, 01 Jun 2006 00:46:51 -0000

[sSRI-Research] Sureme Court Strikes Blow Against Public

Accountability

 

 

 

 

 

 

ALLIANCE FOR HUMAN RESEARCH PROTECTION (AHRP)

Promoting Openness, Full Disclosure, and Accountability

http://www.ahrp.org/cms/

 

FYI

 

Whistleblowers are an integral part of the democratic process--

especially

when the checks and balances are so tilted on the side of those in

seats of

power and control.

 

This ruling will have a serious chilling effect on the willingness of

public

employees to risk their livelihood to expose government fraud and

waste.

Our democratic traditions and the American taxpayer are sacrificed to

shield

those in power.

 

 

Contact: Vera Hassner Sharav

212-595-8974

veracare

 

 

http://www.commondreams.org/cgi-bin/print.cgi?file==/news2006/0530-

04.htm

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

MAY 30, 2006

1:41 PM

 

 

CONTACT: Government Accountability Project

<http://www.whistleblower.org>

Contact: Dylan Blaylock, Communications Director

Phone: 202.408.0034 ext. 137, cell 202.236.3733

Email: dylanb

 

 

Supreme Court Rules against Government Whistleblowers

Garcetti v. Ceballos Ruling Undermines Public Employees' First

Amendment

Rights

 

WASHINGTON - May 30 - Today, the Supreme Court severely limited the

rights

of government employee whistleblowers to protect the public interest.

Through its ruling in Garcetti v. Ceballos, the Court holds that

government

employees' job-related speech is not protected by the first

amendment, a

significant departure from prior law.

 

" The Supreme Court's ruling strikes a shameful blow against free

speech

rights and a vigorous democracy - public employees' ability to serve

as

guardians of good government are severely restricted by this opinion, "

stated Joanne Royce, GAP General Counsel. " A deeply divided, but

majority

court, today upheld the values of " employer control " over the

traditional

American values of freedom and protection of public discourse and

professional dissent. This ruling will have a serious chilling effect

on the

willingness of public employees to risk their livelihood to expose

government fraud and waste. Our democratic traditions and the American

taxpayer are sacrificed to the alter of " employer control. "

 

GAP's amicus curie brief to the Court regarding the case, written by

Royce

and GAP Legal Director Tom Devine, can be found at:

http://www.whistleblower.org/doc/Ceballos%20amicus%20GAP%20NELA%

20ATLA.pdf)

 

The case before the court was that of Richard Ceballos, a deputy

district

attorney in Los Angeles County, California who learned that a deputy

sheriff

lied to obtain a search warrant, Ceballos advised his superiors of the

wrongdoing, and recommended that the county drop its case. His

recommendation was ignored, and his superiors demanded that he

continue with

the prosecution. Ceballos then informed the defense of his findings,

as

required by law. Despite the fact that he had acted in a lawful

fashion,

Ceballos was removed from the case, demoted, and transferred to a

different

office. Ceballos' ordeal is a shining example of how ethical

government

workers are supposed to act - he exposed misconduct that was in gross

violation of the underpinnings of the American justice system. It is a

tragedy that the Supreme Court allowed the government to penalize such

principled behavior.

 

The ramifications of the Supreme Court's decision are devastating to

public

employees who choose to speak out in the interest of the American

people. By

restricting the speech of whistleblowers, the Supreme Court has made

government more susceptible to fraud and corruption. Public employee

truth-tellers are essential to the safety and welfare of our country -

they

expose corruption, fraud, and national security shortcomings. The

muzzling

of such vital contributors to the nation's well-being will certainly

have

grave consequences. Without whistleblowers, government will no longer

be

compelled to act in an accountable and ethical fashion.

 

Tom Devine, GAP Legal Director, commented " This decision is

outrageous.

Canceling the doctrine of " duty speech " means that government

employees only

have an on-the-job right to be " yes people, " parroting false

information and

enabling illegality. The Court alludes to the Whistleblower

Protection Act,

but it has been weakened by a series of limiting court decisions.

House and

Senate Leaders must schedule a vote on legislation to strengthen the

Whistleblower Protection Act, so that government employees are not

punished

for speaking in the public interest. This bill has been unanimously

approved

by Congressional committees for the last two Congresses, but the

leadership

has refused to schedule an up-or-down vote. It is time for Congress

to act. "

 

GAP has been an outspoken advocate of Ceballos' cause, because we see

it as

a vital stop-gap in the protection of employees who speak out, to

protect

the public interest, about wrong-doing. In this case, Ceballos' speech

protects the integrity of the criminal investigation process, and

that is

vital. (See our October 2005 New York Times Op-Ed by GAP

Communications Dylan Blaylock and FBI whistleblower Coleen Rowley,

available at

http://whistleblower.org/content/press_detail.cfm?press_id=22).

 

###

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Drug-Free School Zone? Just Say NO to Prozac for Children.