- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
I do understand that the Supreme Court in Garcetti v Ceballes 04-473 (2006) astonishingly found that there was no protection for whistleblower speech "pursuant to job duties".
But Tamm did his whistleblowing two years earlier, in 2004. Wouldn't he have still been covered by the protections of the 1989 Act? Is the Supreme Court opinion in Garcetti v Ceballes retroactive? Or is this proceeding on the basis of some arcane subclause of the Patriot Act?
And, whatever happened to the Whistleblower Protection Act of 2007, crafted to address this "judicial activism"? Last I heard the Congressional version (HR 985) had been passed with significant bipartisan support, despite Bush's threat to veto, and the Senate version (S274) was on a "hold" from Oklahoma's Tom Coburn. Did it ever get passed? Did Bush veto?
Finally, what, if anything, can the new administration do to end this vindictive persecution of a legitimate whistleblower?
