Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

JPL Background Check Case Reaches Supreme Court

Posted by timothy on from the faster-boys-if-you-want-your-pay dept.

Dthief writes "A long-running legal battle between the United States government and a group of 29 scientists and engineers of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) in Pasadena, California, has now reached the US Supreme Court." At issue: mandatory background checks for scientists and engineers working at JPL, which they allege includes snooping into their sexual orientation, as well as their mental and physical health.

3 of 112 comments (clear)

  1. Re:I'm not clear on what their case is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I am also not entirely sure what the issue is, but it could be something like this: JPL, as an EO employer, cannot discriminate based on sex, race, sexual orientation, etc. Therefore any background checks that are done should not be explicitly seeking out information on, for instance, whether they are gay or not unless there is some outside relevance (eg, their gay S/O is a known terrorist or something). If the background checks /were/ screening for sexual orientation without cause, I can see where they might get uppity about privacy concerns and the like.

    Also, low-level clearances (Secret, for example) are basically just a criminal background check and a quick sweep over the government databases to make sure you're not someone /obviously/ bad. There'd be no reason whatsoever to stick in "are you gay?" to that level of check.

  2. Re:I'm not clear on what their case is... by kriston · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It still does not matter. The customer is the US Government. They want contractors to abide by certain rules including security clearance vetting. These do not involve sexual orientation but they do involve blackmail risks which is perfectly reasonable for them to be concerned about.

    If you do not agree with security clearances you should not work for entities that require them. They really do not care about sexual orientation. They only care about exploitation risks. It really is that simple. The question is: can you be extorted? It's a valid question. It needs to be addressed.

    --

    Kriston

  3. Re:I'm not clear on what their case is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There's no constitutional right to work at JPL.

    STOP IT RIGHT NOW, YOU POMPOUS, BLOODY FUCK!!!

    I am sick to goddamned death of you little shits who pretend to be Constitutional scholars and can't understand (likely due to having never read) the Ninth amendment -- a single clear statement.

    "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

    IOW, asshole, rights need not be explicitly granted to the people.

    Harsh language and harsh argument were had to guarantee the inclusion of the Ninth Amendment in the Bill of Rights. It was absolutely a show-stopper. One sentence used was directly aimed at dipshits like you -- "... otherwise some fool, two hundred years from now, will try to assert that people may not have a certain right, just because we failed to enumerate it."

    Write to your congress-critter, dumbass -- they pass out copies of the Constitution for free.