Homeland Security

A U.S. air marshal alerted the press of a decision by TSA to cut marshals from flights known to be at risk for hijacking. The TSA fired him for “disclosing sensitive information”–a TSA regulation. He appealed based on the fact that he hadn’t broken any law and he had a right to alert the public of safety issues under a U.S. whistleblower law. The U.S. Supreme Court agreed. However, this doesn’t mean that we will be alerted in the future, because Congress or even the President by executive order could make such revelations illegal. See, Dept. Homeland Security v. MacLean, No. 13–894. Argued November 4, 2014—Decided January 21, 2015.

Employee’s and Teacher’s Retirement System of Alabama

Members of the Employees’ and Teachers’ Retirement Systems of Alabama sued David Bronner, executive officer of those systems, claiming he had failed to invest system funds so that they would bring the highest returns. Apparently the plaintiffs weren’t fond of golf courses and office buildings in Alabama. The Alabama Supreme Court ruled that the Circuit Court should dismiss the complaint because Bronner not only has great discretion to choose investments, but also because it’s not the Court’s role to constantly monitor Bronner’s decisions. See, Supreme Court of Alabama, Oct. Term, 2014-2015, 1110472, Ex parte David Bronner (In re: Tonya Denson and Venius Turner v. David Bronner et al., Montgomery Circuit Court, CV-11-900738)