SEARCH
How Far Can ‘Whistle-Blowers’ Go? Supreme Court Will Decide |
|
Most people probably believe “whistle-blower protection” laws and the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment “free speech” protections shield workers from retaliation for speaking out.
Not always and the case of Richard Ceballos, now before the U.S. Supreme Court, will determine just how far public employees can go when publicly pointing out government wrongdoing.
If the high court rules against the former Los Angeles County deputy district attorney, some 20 million public employees could lose their ability to use the First Amendment as protection against management retaliation for exposing government misconduct.
When Ceballos was working as a deputy district attorney in 2000, he discovered that a sheriff’s deputy had lied to obtain a search warrant. Ceballos advised his superiors to drop the case related to the warrant—but instead, they proceeded with the prosecution.
Ceballos then informed the defense team of his findings, as he was required do by law, according the Government Accountability Project (GAP), which submitted a brief in support of Ceballos to the Supreme Court (as has the AFL-CIO). When he was subpoenaed to testify, he told the court about the lies used to obtain the search warrant.
After he testified, Ceballos says he was demoted, transferred and denied a promotion, while his superiors created a hostile work environment. He filed a suit charging his First Amendment rights had been violated. A trial judge dismissed it, but a federal appeals court reversed the ruling. The Supreme Court heard arguments March 21 and a decision is expected later this spring.
The Los Angeles District Attorney’s office claims the First Amendment does not protect Ceballos’ action or the actions of other public employees in similar circumstances. The Bush administration’s Justice Department has filed a brief supporting the denial of First Amendment protections in such cases.
Says GAP general counsel Joanne Royce:
Free speech about the manner in which the government operates is the hallmark of democracy. Government employees are the most knowledgeable about operations and it is paramount for these employees to be protected for speaking the truth when speech is part of their job duties….Without conscientious government employees identifying and reporting government mismanagement and wrongdoing, no bureaucracy is safe from corruption.
For a more detailed look at the case, check out two GAP articles here and here, and for an in-depth legal reading, here’s the AFL-CIO’s brief on the case.
No Comments
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
