Supreme Court takes up case of fired air marshal
Headline Legal News
The Supreme Court agreed Monday to consider the case of a federal air marshal who was fired after leaking information to the press about aviation security plans.
The justices will hear an appeal from the Obama administration, which claims Robert MacLean is not entitled to whistleblower protection for disclosing that the Transportation Security Administration planned to save money by cutting back on overnight trips for undercover air marshals.
MacLean was fired in 2006, three years after he told a reporter the cuts were being made despite a briefing days earlier about an imminent terrorist threat focusing on long-distance flights. MacLean said he leaked the information after his boss ignored his safety concerns.
When news of the planned became public, congressional leaders expressed their concerns and the Department of Homeland Security acknowledged that the plan was a mistake. No flight assignments requiring overnight hotel stays were canceled.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled last year that MacLean should be allowed to present a defense under federal whistleblower laws. But the government argues that the law does not protect employees who reveal "sensitive" security information.
MacLean asserts that no law specifically prohibited him from revealing the information because it wasn't considered sensitive when it was shared with him. The agency's decision to curb the overnight trips was sent as a text to MacLean's cellphone without using more secure methods. He says the law protects government employees who report violations of the law or specific danger to public safety.
Related listings
-
Court: Red Bulls must pay $2.8M in property tax
Headline Legal News 05/16/2014A New Jersey appeals court ruled Monday that the state's Major League Soccer franchise is liable for nearly $3 million in property taxes to the town of Harrison. The New York Red Bulls have played at Red Bull Arena in Harrison since 2010. During that...
-
European court: Google must yield on personal info
Headline Legal News 05/13/2014People should have some say over the results that pop up when they conduct a search of their own name online, Europe's highest court said Tuesday. In a landmark decision, The Court of Justice of the European Union said Google must listen and sometime...
-
Casino law hinges on Massachusetts high court case
Headline Legal News 05/05/2014The fate of casino gambling in Massachusetts may hinge on a case before the state's highest court Monday. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court is set to hear arguments in a case centered on whether a question should be allowed on the November bal...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.