- Pope Francis wins another ‘Person of the Year’ — from gay rights magazine
- Rep. Steve Stockman: Give my campaign $10, and you’ll get an Obama barf bag
- Putin: Russia to buy $15 billion in Ukraine bonds
- Expert: Obamacare ‘death spiral’ fears exaggerated
- Alabama firefighters dig for survivors of apartment blast
- Big Sur wildfire destroys home of firefighting chief
- ‘ ’Twas the Night Before Christmas’ set for mock trial to argue authorship
- Angela Merkel’s third term as Germany’s chancellor to be marked by move to left
- Mega Millions entices with record-setting jackpot: Half a billion so far
- Dennis Rodman heads to North Korea — despite execution, political purge
Supreme Court upholds background checks
Rules against contracted employees at NASA
The Supreme Court on Wednesday unanimously upheld the federal government’s ability to conduct background security checks of contracted employees, ruling against a group of NASA-contracted scientists and engineers who had challenged the agencies drug-screening process on privacy grounds.
Two justices went so far as to say that such a privacy right does not exist.
“Like many other desirable things not included in the Constitution, ‘informational privacy’ seems like a good idea — wherefore the people have enacted laws at the federal level and in the states restricting the government’s collection and use of information,” Justice Antonin Scalia wrote in a concurring opinion, echoing statements he made during October oral arguments in the case.
“A federal constitutional right to ‘informational privacy’ does not exist,” he wrote.
The 8-0 ruling came as no surprise as the justices appeared unmoved during oral arguments by the scientists’ claims that their rights to privacy were violated by a question on a government form asking whether they had received drug treatments.
Only eight justices participated in the case because Justice Elena Kagan, who was involved in formulating the government’s argument in the case in her previous job as the Obama administration’s solicitor general, recused herself from the hearing.
The high court’s decision overturns a ruling from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in California, considered the nation’s most liberal and frequently overturned courts, that sided with the employees.
The federal government appealed that ruling to the Supreme Court, arguing that background checks are necessary and widespread. The government further warned of a slippery slope in which siding with the scientists could lead to all sorts of challenges and ultimately undermine the effectiveness of important security protocols.
In the case, NASA v. Nelson, a group of 28 long-term contract employees at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in California, sued in 2007 shortly after such background checks were implemented for contractors.
When the scientists were hired, such background checks were only conducted on civil service employees, not contractors. That changed after President George W. Bush, acting on a recommendation from the 9/11 Commission, ordered that contractors with long-term access to federal facilitates, such as the scientists working at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, be subject to the same background screenings as civil service employees.
The case would not have any impact on private-sector background checks. The high court noted in its opinion that more than 88 percent of private employers in the U.S. utilize background screenings.
“As this long history suggests, the government has an interest in conducting basic employment background checks,” Justice Alito wrote. “Reasonable investigations of applicants and employees aid the government in ensuring the security of its facilities and in employing a competent, reliable workforce.”
Justice Alito wrote that the background checks help the government ensure the security of its facilities and that its employees are competent and reliable. It makes no difference whether the workers are contract employees, he wrote.
© Copyright 2013 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
About the Author
Ben Conery is a member of the investigative team covering the Supreme Court and legal affairs. Prior to coming to The Washington Times in 2008, Mr. Conery covered criminal justice and legal affairs for daily newspapers in Connecticut and Massachusetts. He was a 2006 recipient of the New England Newspaper Association’s Publick Occurrences Award for a series of articles about ...
By John R. Bolton
The president fiddles at his domestic altar while the world burns
- PRUDEN: The scam that will not die
- Robert E. Lee and 'Stonewall' Jackson tributes face Army War College removal
- LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Global-warming mania's deadly fallout
- Embassy Row: India strikes back over diplomat's arrest
- Wasted: Tom Coburn's 'Wastebook targets 70 days in bed, Facebook
- Army to cut up to 4,000 captains and majors
- BOLTON: Nero in the White House
- Zadzooks: The Joker sixth scale figure review (Sideshow Collectibles)
- Senators in rush to pass budget vow to undo cut to military retirement pay
- Mega Millions players dream of a green Christmas with lottery jackpot at $636 million
Independent voices from the The Washington Times Communities
Television commentary, reviews, news and nonstop DVR catch-up by Lisa King Dolloff and friends.
Wall Street news for retail investors who want to know what's going on.
Top 10 handguns in the U.S.
Extraordinary day at Redskins Park
White House pets gone wild!
Let it snow