SCOTUS: Don't Reveal Illegal Activity
See, now it's fecal matter like this that makes me want to cut my internet cable and go back into sequestration.
When I saw this I thought well, there must be some legal niceties that I'm missing here... But Mark Kleiman (actual lawyer and smart guy) is appalled, too, so I'm less optimistic about that now. And my optimism fades completely when I note that this decision is basically good guys vs. bad guys (Roberts, Scalito, Thomas and Kennedy vs. Stephens, Souter, Breyer and Ginsburg). (Roberts and Alito aren't really known to be bad guys yet...but it doesn't look good.)
So remember: it ain't illegal if the gub'mint does it. Or, rather, it's illegal, but you better not point it out. Not if you want to keep your job, Dudley Do-Right. Just keep your eyes on the ground and your big trap shut.
See, now it's fecal matter like this that makes me want to cut my internet cable and go back into sequestration.
When I saw this I thought well, there must be some legal niceties that I'm missing here... But Mark Kleiman (actual lawyer and smart guy) is appalled, too, so I'm less optimistic about that now. And my optimism fades completely when I note that this decision is basically good guys vs. bad guys (Roberts, Scalito, Thomas and Kennedy vs. Stephens, Souter, Breyer and Ginsburg). (Roberts and Alito aren't really known to be bad guys yet...but it doesn't look good.)
So remember: it ain't illegal if the gub'mint does it. Or, rather, it's illegal, but you better not point it out. Not if you want to keep your job, Dudley Do-Right. Just keep your eyes on the ground and your big trap shut.
posted by Winston Smith at
7:46 PM
1 Comments:
Agreement with you from an acquaintance of mine on the right---a prosecutor, a top-credentialed lawyer.
The discussion is good, too. Many folks who know what they're talking about.
I'm not going to delve in because it makes my head hurt. The arguments against the decision are pretty plain: freedom, public accountability, First Amendment, all that. Still, I don't know if it really is a 1st Amendment issue, nor if public employees can go off half-cocked whenever they feel like it. (I'd think SCOTUS was also contemplating things like dissidents leaking national intelligence and teachers spouting off their politics in front of captive audiences.)
As with most things, good arguments on both sides.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home