Court Allows Scientists to Work at NASA Until Trial Over Background

FYI,

"Court Allows Scientists to Work at NASA Until Trial Over Background
Checks"
New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/12/us/12jpl.html?
_r=1&ei=5089&en=c9802ee2542923d6&ex57880400&partner=rssyahoo&emc=rs
s&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin

: A group of scientists working at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory
: won a round in federal court on Friday in their challenge to a Bush
: administration requirement that they submit to extensive background
: checks or face losing their jobs.

: The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in
: California, issued an opinion allowing the scientists to continue
: working until the question of their privacy challenge can be
: addressed at a full trial.

: They had sued the administration over a new domestic security
: requirement that all contract workers at the laboratory, which is
: run jointly by NASA and the California Institute of Technology,
: undergo background checks and identification requirements. The
: 26 scientists and engineers filing the suit, whose jobs the
: government classifies as "low risk," argued that the background
: checks, which could include information on finances, psychiatric
: care and sexual practices, constituted an unacceptable invasion of
: their privacy.

: The government, which is requiring the upgraded security review at
: every federal agency, argued that the contract employees be held to
: the same standard.

: A lower court had denied the scientists' request for an injunction
: to block the background checks; in the opinion released Friday, the
: court of appeals reversed that decision and sent the case back to
: the lower court.

: "This is truly a vindication for these scientists and engineers,"
: said Dan Stormer, a lawyer for the plaintiffs. "They've been loyal
: and hard-working and committed to science and this country and
: they've been threatened with the loss of their jobs simply because
: they stood up for their constitutional rights. Any way you address
: that, it's wrong."

: The government, Mr. Stormer added, had taken a "talismanic use of
: the word `terror' to overcome constitutional protections."

: The court's language was strong, stating that the questions asked
: on the government's forms for the background checks were so
: "open-ended and highly private" that it was "difficult to see how
: they could be narrowly tailored to meet any legitimate need" and
: there were "absolutely no safeguards in place to limit the
: disclosures to information relevant to these interests." NASA, the
: court ruled, had proved no damage that would come to the agency if
: it could not carry out the background checks.

: Michael Cabbage, a spokesman for the National Aeronautics and Space
: Administration, said, "NASA will, of course, comply with any
: rulings from the court of appeals."

Mark Reiff