Former Justice Department lawyer Jesselyn Radack filed a lawsuit Oct. 28, claiming that the Department of Justice (DOJ) forced her out after she raised objections over the interrogation of "American Taliban" John Walker Lindh. According to Radack, the DOJ's interrogation of Lindh, the American captured while fighting with the Taliban in Afghanistan, violated federal law. Even after Lindh's father retained a lawyer for him, DOJ officials interrogated Lindh without his attorney present. Lindh eventually pled guilty to aiding the Taliban and was sentenced to 20 years in prison. The DOJ apparently attempted to cover-up the ethics violation by omitting files, including memorandums Radack had written regarding the improper interrogation, from the case file. Radack's e-mail correspondences addressing her legal concerns were never turned over to a criminal court, despite a court order that all internal documents be submitted. The secrecy surrounding the case made it difficult for Radack to know exactly which documents the judge received. After pressing the issue through official channels, Radack claims she was threatened with a negative review and was told to leave the DOJ. She ultimately resigned in April 2002. Radack later released her e-mail memorandums to Newsweek magazine, expecting to be protected by a federal whistleblower statute that protects individuals reporting government impropriety. Instead, the DOJ opened a criminal investigation into her disclosure and notified the bar associations of Maryland and the District of Columbia of her actions. Radack claims no private law firm will hire her until the matter is resolved. This case involves two areas where the public's ability to receive important information has been significantly weakened -- homeland security and whistleblower protections. Since 9/11, the government has instituted new broad restrictions on information, even though an independent commission has concluded that excessive information restrictions contributed to the country's vulnerability to terrorist attack. Additionally, recognition and protection of whistleblowers, who are often the public's only hope of learning about the government's most egregious errors and injustices, has been declining. Legislation to strengthen these protections is currently before Congress, although it may not make it to the floor before this session ends. Without an open government, the public has no way of holding it accountable for its actions.