Search Site
Menu
Is Edward Snowden a Whistleblower?

The Federation of German Scientists (VDW), the International Association of Lawyers against Nuclear Arms (IALANA) and Transparency International bestowed the German Whistleblower Prize upon Edward Snowden, the former National Security Agency (NSA) contractor who leaked information about the NSA’s surveillance of internet and phone activity.  

A Quinnipiac University national poll, conducted shortly after Snowden obtained asylum in Russia, reveals that 55 percent of Americans view Snowden as a whistleblower and 34 percent view him as a traitor. The question of whether Snowden is a true whistleblower concerned for the public remains a hot issue.

The arguments against Snowden

While the title of whistleblower may have been fitting when Snowden released data of the National Security Agency’s storing of Americans’ internet and telephone activity, when he continued to leak information about America’s international spying activity, opponents argue that he assumed the status of a traitor. These controversial leaks include revealing NSA foreign surveillance targets to governments of Brazil, Germany and China. Snowden also allegedly crossed the boundary of impropriety when he revealed England’s secret internet surveillance base in the Middle East. Opponents to Snowden being labeled a whistleblower conclude that revealing information about America’s spying activity poses national security risks and exposes his impure motives.

The arguments for Snowden

The Whistleblower Protection Act guards any disclosure that an employee reasonably thinks reveals any violation of any rule, regulation, law or gross mismanagement, a significant waste of funds, and abuse of authority or a major danger to public safety. Under this definition, proponents argue, Snowden is a whistleblower because he revealed data that the U.S. was abusing its authority by monitoring citizens’ phone calls and internet activity without any justification. 

Since Snowden blew the whistle on the NSA, at least five lawsuits have been filed challenging the legality of the exposed surveillance programs. In addition, more than a dozen pieces of legislation have been filed in Congress to restrict these public surveillance authorities and enhance the programs’ transparency.  This legal and legislative activity evidence the appropriateness of Snowden’s whistleblower title. 

To blow or not to blow the whistle on government improprieties is a difficult decision that requires consultation with a seasoned Texas whistleblower lawyer.  We are committed to helping you protect your interests.  

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Honors
Our Office
  • Dallas Office
    4514 Cole Ave
    #600
    Dallas, Texas 75205
    Phone: 214-306-8045
    Fax: 469-729-9926
Testimonials
  • "Steve Kardell was terrific in representing me in some very adversarial discussions with Citigroup and also later represented me in my testimony before the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission."  -Richard Bowen, Citigroup Whistleblower

  • "Incredible knowledge of employee related concerns and equally brilliant knowledge of health care regulations, standards of practice. I would recommend this firm to anyone."  -V.B.

  • "Reaching out to Steve Kardell was the best decision I made. His ability to provide immediate insight and direction was very powerful, and a huge relief during a very stressful time period. For anyone struggling with a whistleblower situation, I would highly recommend at least speaking with Steve. After a 10 minute call with him, I had a better understanding of what I was dealing with. Even better, he gave me some immediate hope. In the end Steve did a better job than I thought was possible. Steve was able to get in contact with people in my organization, that I didn’t have access to. Because of his years of experience, he already has contacts in many organizations in Dallas. The entire situation was handled peacefully. I was impressed by his ability to “keep the peace”–rather than creating a battle with the organization. The reason I didn’t reach out to a lawyer initially, was because I thought it would mean an immediate end to any hope of a positive relationship with the company. Steve was able to address my concerns, and in the end I was able to continue to work for them."  -KS

  • "Never thought my career would end like it did after 30 years of service. I was part of the first round of the so called reduction of force. I asked myself how can I be part of this with 30 years of seniority. How did they pick these 90 plus employees? Now, the culture of this organization made you question every decision they made. It wasn’t what you knew it’s was a culture of who you know. Nonetheless, I did not accept their severance package. I immediately starting looking for an attorney who would take on my case. After the initial call to Steve I had hope again. He was open and honest about everything and reassured me he would do his best for me, and he did. I had an awesome outcome. Thanks Steve you’re the best."  -S.S.

FOLLOW US
Facebook Twitter Linkedin RSS Feed JD Supra