
Joel N. Kreizman
Partner
732-568-8363 jkreizman@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: Joel N. Kreizman
Date: May 27, 2014
Partner
732-568-8363 jkreizman@sh-law.comIn 2003, MacLean was working for the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) as an air marshal. He was briefed about a potential terrorist attack and, shortly thereafter, received notice from TSA that the agency was reducing the number of undercover air marshals on overnight trips due to budget deficits. MacLean voiced his concerns to his boss, who told him to keep quiet. Instead, MacLean leaked the information to MSNBC. Within the next day, the Department of Homeland Security had canceled the manpower reduction order.
MacLean, whose identity had been concealed after the leak, was fired by TSA in 2006 when his identity was discovered. MacLean appeared on an NBC Nightly News program, regarding a different incident, but his disguise was inadequate.
A lower court ruled that MacLean was entitled to argue that he was protected by whistleblower laws. However, the government is asking the Supreme Court to reverse that decision, arguing it “effectively permits individual federal employees to override the TSA’s judgments about the dangers of public disclosure.”
MacLean’s response portrays him as a hero who prevented a potential tragedy and helped change government policy. MacLean had previously argued that TSA’s plan to eliminate the use of air marshals on overnight trips was not considered sensitive information by the agency because it had been sent unencrypted to his cellphone.
We will report back when the Court provides an answer to what should happen when an individual employee’s determination of what public safety requires clashes with the determinations of his supervisors as to what’s required. Does the concern for public safety outweigh the usual requirement to follow the chain of command?
If you have any questions about the case discussed above or would like to discuss other employment law matters, please contact me or the Scarinci Hollenbeck attorney with whom you work.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Your home is likely your greatest asset, which is why it is so important to adequately protect it. Homeowners insurance protects you from the financial costs of unforeseen losses, such as theft, fire, and natural disasters, by helping you rebuild and replace possessions that were lost While the definition of “adequate” coverage depends upon a […]
Author: Jesse M. Dimitro
Making a non-contingent offer can dramatically increase your chances of securing a real estate transaction, particularly in competitive markets like New York City. However, buyers should understand that waiving contingencies, including those related to financing, or appraisals, also comes with significant risks. Determining your best strategy requires careful analysis of the property, the market, and […]
Author: Jesse M. Dimitro
Business Transactional Attorney Zemel to Spearhead Strategic Initiatives for Continued Growth and Innovation Little Falls, NJ – February 21, 2025 – Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC is pleased to announce that Partner Fred D. Zemel has been named Chair of the firm’s Strategic Planning Committee. In this role, Mr. Zemel will lead the committee in identifying, […]
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Big changes sometimes occur during the life cycle of a contract. Cancelling a contract outright can be bad for your reputation and your bottom line. Businesses need to know how to best address a change in circumstances, while also protecting their legal rights. One option is to transfer the “benefits and the burdens” of a […]
Author: Dan Brecher
What is a trade secret and why you you protect them? Technology has made trade secret theft even easier and more prevalent. In fact, businesses lose billions of dollars every year due to trade secret theft committed by employees, competitors, and even foreign governments. But what is a trade secret? And how do you protect […]
Author: Ronald S. Bienstock
If you are considering the purchase of a property, you may wonder — what is title insurance, do I need it, and why do I need it? Even seasoned property owners may question if the added expense and extra paperwork is really necessary, especially considering that people and entities insured by title insurance make fewer […]
Author: Patrick T. Conlon
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
In 2003, MacLean was working for the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) as an air marshal. He was briefed about a potential terrorist attack and, shortly thereafter, received notice from TSA that the agency was reducing the number of undercover air marshals on overnight trips due to budget deficits. MacLean voiced his concerns to his boss, who told him to keep quiet. Instead, MacLean leaked the information to MSNBC. Within the next day, the Department of Homeland Security had canceled the manpower reduction order.
MacLean, whose identity had been concealed after the leak, was fired by TSA in 2006 when his identity was discovered. MacLean appeared on an NBC Nightly News program, regarding a different incident, but his disguise was inadequate.
A lower court ruled that MacLean was entitled to argue that he was protected by whistleblower laws. However, the government is asking the Supreme Court to reverse that decision, arguing it “effectively permits individual federal employees to override the TSA’s judgments about the dangers of public disclosure.”
MacLean’s response portrays him as a hero who prevented a potential tragedy and helped change government policy. MacLean had previously argued that TSA’s plan to eliminate the use of air marshals on overnight trips was not considered sensitive information by the agency because it had been sent unencrypted to his cellphone.
We will report back when the Court provides an answer to what should happen when an individual employee’s determination of what public safety requires clashes with the determinations of his supervisors as to what’s required. Does the concern for public safety outweigh the usual requirement to follow the chain of command?
If you have any questions about the case discussed above or would like to discuss other employment law matters, please contact me or the Scarinci Hollenbeck attorney with whom you work.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!