Court Tightens Whistle-Blower Rules »

This Story is Archived and Commenting is Closed

Comments: 7

• 
  Avg rating: (+3/-0 3)

  STONERS

  March 27, 2007, 11:26 a.m.

  The court ruled 6-2 that James Stone, an 81-year-old retired engineer, may not collect a penny for his role in exposing fraud at the now-closed Rocky Flats nuclear weapons plant northwest of Denver.

  Writing for the court, Justice Antonin Scalia said Stone was not an original source of the information that resulted in Rockwell International, now part of aerospace giant Boeing Co., being ordered to pay the government nearly $4.2 million for fraud connected with environmental cleanup at the Rocky Flats plant.
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  Natfan

  March 27, 2007, 3:25 p.m.

  party-poopers, is what they SHOULD be called. How are you gonna go and blow the whistle before all the plundering is done? That's just rude.
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-3 -3)

  Watchemoket

  March 27, 2007, 4:22 p.m.

  I don't think too much should be read into this case, which appears to rest on an factual determination rather than a real interpretation of the law.

  Nontheless, I was pleasantly surprised to see that the Bush administration was backing the whistleblower in his claim. I am cynical enough to wonder why (what do we not know?) but optimistic enough to be pleased to see it, anyway.
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-3 -3)

  NelsonR

  March 27, 2007, 5:05 p.m.

  Agree his case lacked merit. Now lets address another decision that the Supreme Court was, in my thoughts, in total error concerning Eminent Domain. I bring this up to equate insanity within our highest court.

  Why should any local community have the right to take private property, not for the public good, but for the good of private individuals. Using the excuse of raising the tax base of a community does not warrant arbitrary taking of ones property. America has always held the belief that private property was sacrosanct unless the public good such as government requirements were met, schools, highways etc.

  These supreme courts justices should have their own personal residences determined to have met the requirements of eminent domain and be taken from them. I wonder what their attitude would then be. These are not gods but part of the culture of corruption within government. I err on the side of private property rights. Supreme court justices are not idols of worship.

All 7 comments are shown.