So the Supreme Court made it harder for government whistleblowers to prove they have been retaliated against when they claim there is corruption in the government or big business. Samuel Alieto (not a typo) cast the deciding vote making it 5-4. http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/politics/14699001.htm
Now let me see if I understand this right. Person sees the government or business (mind you it doesn't matter what party is in control corruption is corruption) involved in wrong doing feels the press and public should know about it it's ok for the government or business to fire them as retalliation. If I understand the rulling right?
That is wrong on so many levels.