Do Workers Have The Right To Lie? High Court Ponders Question

Tell your boss a lie to cover up misconduct and you’ll often face stiffer punishment than if you told the truth. Chief Justice William Rehnquist sees a moral there: Don’t lie.

The Supreme Court is considering if that applies to federal employees.

The government tried to fire social worker Jeanette Walsh when she had sex with a patient at a VA medical center in St. Cloud, Minn., and then denied it to her bosses. An appeals board reduced the penalty to a suspension, saying she should be punished for the sex - but not the lie.

Paul Marth, a lawyer speaking for Walsh and several other disciplined workers at a Supreme Court hearing Tuesday, said employees should be allowed to falsely deny allegations of wrongdoing without fear that they’ll face stiffer punishment than if they told the truth. He compared it to pleading “not guilty” to a crime.

Solicitor General Seth Waxman said that would impede investigators and remove any incentive for an employee to admit to misconduct. Lying would be “cost-free,” he said.

To Rehnquist and other justices it made sense that someone would be disciplined more severely for lying about misconduct than for admitting to it. “The moral of this is don’t lie,” said Rehnquist.

“That’s the moral we hope they derive,” replied Waxman.

The court is considering five cases, including Walsh’s, in which the federal Merit Systems Protection Board and an appeals court disallowed extra punishment based on an employee’s false statements.

Walsh’s punishment was reduced to a 90-day suspension. She lied to the Department of Veterans Affairs in 1991 when questioned about an 18-month sexual relationship she had with an alcoholic patient in 1988-89.

The appeals court said it was OK for an employee to deny wrongdoing but not to make up a story to cover it up.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said that would give federal workers a right “that surely does not exist for private employees.”

In criminal cases, covering up an offense often carries a harsher penalty than the offense itself, noted Justice John Paul Stevens.

Rehnquist brought up the McCarthy-era case of Alger Hiss, who was convicted of perjury rather than spying because the statute of limitations had expired on the espionage allegations. “Lying can produce an offense where there was none before. That’s what Congress has said,” Rehnquist said.

Justice Sandra Day O’Connor couldn’t understand the distinction the appeals court drew between denying allegations and telling a false cover story. “How do you draw a line there?” she asked.

A false story could pose less of an obstacle to investigators than a simple denial, because they could check out the story, said Rehnquist.