Dep't of Homeland Sec. v. Maclean (574 U.S. 383)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided January 21, 2015 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 574 U.S. 383 · 135 S. Ct. 913
- Decided
- January 21, 2015
- Term
- October Term 2014
- Vote
- 7–2
- Majority author
- Justice Roberts
- Issue area
- First Amendment
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome
- Petitioning party lost
- Ideological direction
- Liberal
Opinion excerpt
Chief Justice ROBERTSdelivered the opinion of the Court. Federal law generally provides whistleblower protections to an employee who discloses information revealing "any violation of any law, rule, or regulation," or "a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety." 5 U.S.C. § 2302(b)(8)(A). An exception exists, however, for disclosures that are "specifically prohibited by law." Ibid.Here, a federal air marshal publicly disclosed that the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) had decided to cut costs by removing air marshals from certain long-distance flights. The question presented is whether that disclosure was "specifically prohibited by law." I A In 2002, Congress enacted the Homeland Security Act, 116 Stat. 2135. As relevant here, that Act provides that the TSA "shall prescribe regulations prohibiting the disclosure of information obtained or developed in carrying out security ... if the Under Secretary decides that disclosing the information would ... be detrimental to the security of transportation." 49 U.S.C. § 114(r)(1)(C). Around the same time, the TSA promulgated regulations prohibiting the unauthorized disclosure of what it called "sensitive security information." See 67 Fed.Reg. 8351 (2002). The regulations described 18 categories of sensitive security information, including "[s]pecific details of aviation security measures ... [such as]…
Excerpt of a 37,019-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.