Nathan on today's decision by the Supremes:

In a close 5-4 decision (O'Connor the positive swing vote on this one), the Supreme Court held today that a coach complaining of violations by Birmingham public schools of Title IX rules requiring equality in womens' sports was protected against retaliation for his charges. Title IX is silent on whether a whistleblower who has not suffered direct harm themselves have a right to sue for such retaliation. However, the court explained that any time a law prohibits discrimination, a person speaking out on the existence of such discrimination -- even if the initial discrimination was not aimed at them -- have themselves suffered discrimination if any retaliation then occurs. This is a major victory for whistleblowers, since it announces a principle that those witnessing illegal activity need not wait for direct harm to themselves to act...Such witnesses are often the best people to help enforce laws, because they are in a better position to monitor social harm than government agencies...How far this principle will be expanded to other areas of the law will be seen, but it does mean that the failure of a law to specifically protect whistleblowers does not automatically shut the court room door to a legal claim.