This blog is a collection of what goes through the mind of a father, a husband, a son, a friend, a lawyer (not your lawyer), and a storyteller, all competing for attention in my head.
The golden rule applies here.
Being blissfully ignorant, since I haven't read the Texas decision, nor do I think often about whistleblowers, I'd have to start by asking, "what expanded rights are they seeking?" Still keeping myself uninformed, I'm having a hard time imagining why they should have greater rights. Lesser rights would, of course, be appalling, but I don't see the greater rights. I was thinking a material reward might be useful when they're vindicated, but I'd be careful of that, lest we end up like East Germany, where every man proved to be spying on his neighbor.
I guessed the 5-4 and who they were before I even looked at the opinion. Interesting question. I will have to mull this one over a little bit. Expecially when you are dealing with someone working for a prosecutor (an elected position) you wonder where the line should be?
Post a Comment