Robert M. Nelson: If Brown’s sincere commitment to scientific inquiry free from witch hunts is to be realized in the Trump era, the incoming NASA administrator would have to transfer JPL management from Caltech to UC. This seems unlikely.
Skip Hickambottom and Dale Gronemeier: The uninitiated might believe it preposterous that a Cat on an Abstract could cause mighty men to tremble.
In the wake of an 8-0 setback by the United States Supreme Court last week, the JPL plaintiffs in the HSPD12 case said they would now wait to see what NASA does in response to the decision. In a communication released to the JPL staff today the employees said “The ball is now in NASA’s court.
On January 19, 2011 the U.S. Supreme Court announced that it had decided in favor of the government in the matter of NASA, et al., v. Robert M. Nelson et al. In a unanimous decision, the court found that the questions the 28 JPL employees challenged were appropriate for the protection of JPL as a federal facility.
Scientists at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory today released NASA documents that support their demand that acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal retract remarks made before the United States Supreme Court on October 5 in the case of Nelson et al. v. NASA et al (09-530)
A group of scientists, engineers, and administrative personnel at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory have demanded that the United States Attorney General’s office issue an immediate retraction of remarks made before the United States Supreme Court on Tuesday by acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal in the case of Nelson et al. vs NASA et al.
The Supreme Court of the United States has scheduled October 5, 2010 to hear argument on the matter of open-ended background investigations of federal contractors arising from Homeland Security Presidential Directive #12 (Nelson et al. vs NASA, No. 09-530).
Thwarting the Bush Administration’s latest assault on individual liberty, a small band of Jet Propulsion Laboratory employees have fought and won—at least for now—a battle against government efforts to trample their rights to privacy and indirectly limit their scientific inquiry. The assault began innocently enough. In tightening security after the September 11th attacks on the […]