|
|
|
Court seems to favor fired whistleblower
Top Court Watch |
2014/11/05 14:38
|
The Supreme Court on Tuesday seemed inclined to rule in favor of a former federal air marshal who wants whistleblower protection for leaking information about aviation security plans.
Several of the justices indicated during oral argument that Robert MacLean did not violate the law when he revealed to a reporter government plans to cut back on overnight trips for undercover air marshals despite a potential terror threat.
MacLean said he leaked the information to an MSNBC reporter after supervisors ignored his safety concerns. His revelations in 2003 triggered outrage in Congress and the Department of Homeland Security quickly decided not to make the cutbacks, acknowledging it was a mistake.
But MacLean was fired from the Transportation Security Administration three years later, after the government discovered he was the leaker.
A federal appeals court ruled last year that MacLean should be allowed to present a defense under federal whistleblower laws. The Obama administration argues that whistleblower laws contain a major exception — they do not protect employees who reveal information "prohibited by law."
Deputy Solicitor General Ian Gershengorn told the justices that TSA regulations specifically prohibit disclosure of "sensitive security information," including any information relating to air marshal deployments.
But several of the justices pointed out that the Whistleblower Protection Act refers only to other laws, not agency regulations.
"So it is prohibited by regulations, let's not play games," Justice Antonin Scalia told Gershengorn.
Justice Stephen Breyer suggested that since no law seemed to ban the kind of information MacLean leaked, the president could simply issue an executive order to keep TSA workers from disclosing that kind of information. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Indiana Business litigation attorney
Attorney Blog News |
2014/11/05 14:37
|
We at Price Waicukauski & Riley, LLC have over 100 years combined court experience. With the expertise you need for your legal issues, we are here for you every step of the way. Our team has delt with many complicated cases over the years, often involving the biggest law firms in the US.
Our Indiana Business Litigation attorneys are consistently given high ratings for both ethics and overall quality of counsel. Many of us have been recognized as Indiana Super Lawyers (in the top 5% out of a peer vote) and been given AV ratings from Martindale-Hubbell (the best rating). In addition to positive ratings from peers and clients, many of our attorneys have also been tapped to represent thousands of people in class action cases on both the federal and state level.
Each client is an individual to us, not a case number. As a smaller agency, we are able to give personalized attention to each case. We are dedicated to giving you a better experience than larger law firms.
We offer business clients several alternatives to the traditional billable hour, including fixed fees, contingency fees, and blended fee arrangements. We share in the risk of litigation by sharing the financial burden of the case. As a result, our interests are aligned and we are both working toward a common goal.
There are a number of payment options available to our business clients. You can arrange for blended fee arrangements, or traditional billable hours that include fixed and contingency fees. In many cases we share the financial burden of litigation, therefore uniting us under a common interest.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Southern California Personal Injury Lawyers
Law Firm Press Release |
2014/11/04 15:51
|
Here at the Law Offices of Robert W. Jackson, APC, we are expert trial Lawyers with the ability to present and prepare your case professionally. This professionalism with prevent you and your attorney from being bullied by insurance companies.
Our objective is to secure fair compensation for your injuries, no matter where that takes place. As trial lawyers, we are not scared to go to court, and we will not convince you to take a small settlement out of fear of a trial. We are unafraid of the insurance companies,and we will fight till the end to get you what you deserve. Other lawyers aim to get a settlement, and if that doesn't work they are scared to go to trial. Often times, such attorneys will refer you to experienced trial lawyers like us.
We at the Law Offices of Robert W. Jackson, APC understand that you are going through a difficult time with your injury or auto accident. The physical, financial, and emotional toll it takes on you can be overwhelming. It is our goal to ease your burdens and help facilitate resolution with insurance companies, opposing lawyers, medical facilities, and government agencies. Conveniently located in Fallbrook and Cardiff, California, we are poised to represent those throughout San Diego County.
If you do not take the proper steps immediately, your claim for an injury may be seriously degraded. Seek medical treatment for your injuries and pain immediately, and then call us for a consultation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court rejects appeal over Senate filibuster rules
Law Firm Press Release |
2014/11/04 15:50
|
The Supreme Court on Monday rejected an appeal from a public interest group and four members of Congress who challenged the Senate filibuster as unconstitutional.
The justices let stand a lower court ruling that said Common Cause and the lawmakers did not have legal standing to pursue the case.
The plaintiffs argued that Senate rules requiring at least 60 votes to bring legislation to a vote violates the constitutional principle of majority rule. A federal appeals court said the lawsuit was filed against the wrong parties.
The case was brought against Vice President Joe Biden in his role as president of the Senate, and against the Senate's secretary, parliamentarian and sergeant at arms.
Common Cause says it can't sue the Senate directly because that is barred under the Constitution's Speech and Debate Clause.
Last year, the Senate voted to end use of the filibuster rule from blocking most presidential nominees. Democrats said they ended the rule out of frustration that Republicans were routinely using the tactic to block President Barack Obama's nominees for pivotal judgeships and other top jobs.
But 60 votes are still required to end filibusters against legislation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Health overhaul's subsidies at Supreme Court
Top Court Watch |
2014/10/30 11:23
|
Supreme Court justices have their first chance this week to decide whether they have the appetite for another major fight over President Barack Obama's health care law.
Some of the same players who mounted the first failed effort to kill the law altogether now want the justices to rule that subsidies that help millions of low- and middle-income people afford their premiums under the law are illegal.
The challengers are appealing a unanimous ruling of a three-judge panel of the federal appeals court in Richmond, Virginia, that upheld Internal Revenue Service regulations that allow health-insurance tax credits under the Affordable Care Act for consumers in all 50 states. The appeal is on the agenda for the justices' private conference on Friday, and word of their action could come as early as Monday.
The fight over subsidies is part of a long-running political and legal campaign to overturn Obama's signature domestic legislation by Republicans and other opponents of the law. Republican candidates have relentlessly attacked Democrats who voted for it, and the partisanship has continued on the federal bench. Every judge who has voted to strike down the subsidies was appointed by a Republican president.
The appeal has arrived at the Supreme Court at a curious time; there is no conflicting appeals court ruling that the justices often say is a virtual requirement for them to take on an issue. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg cited that practice, for example, as a reason she and her colleagues decided not to take on the same-sex marriage issue. And in the gay marriage cases, both sides were urging the court to step in. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Law Promo can construct your law firm a brand new responsive website, or help you redesign your existing site to secure your place in the internet world. Small Law Firm Web Design by Law Promo |
|
|
Recent Lawyer Blog Updates |
|
Lawyer News RSS
