Whistleblower Retaliation Should Never be Undermined
Recently, some commentators have suggested that two whistleblowers acted illegally by disclosing grand jury information to Senator Chuck Grassley and the Senate Judiciary Committee. The evidence they shared was reportedly relevant to allegations that Special Counsel Jack Smith had engaged in surveillance of eight Congressional offices. The claim of illegality relies on Justice Department memoranda concluding that disclosures about prosecutions "are not likely to be protected" by the Whistleblower Protection Act because they implicate grand jury secrecy laws. In effect, the argument suggests that these whistleblowers are legally subject to termination or even criminal prosecution.
As an organization dedicated to protecting lawful whistleblowers, we have to state that the conclusion is incorrect.
First, federal employees do not need the Whistleblower Protection Act to communicate lawfully with Congress. Since the Lloyd–La Follette Act of 1912, their right to furnish information directly to Congress has been unequivocally protected. The law states:
The right of employees, individually or collectively, to petition Congress or a Member of Congress, or to furnish information to either House of Congress, or to a committee or a member thereof, may not be interfered with or denied.
The only exception concerns classified information, for which Congress created limited, specific procedures under the Intelligence Whistleblower...
Caesar Munir Wilson, a self-proclaimed sovereign citizen, may not have viewed the federal government as an entity that held legitimate legal authority over his life. Judging by the tax filing scam...