Protecting Idiosyncratic Scientists

The ongoing story about employee reaction to stepped-up background checks required under Homeland Security Presidential Directive 12 is fascinating. This week, a judge ruled that NASA's new questionnaire isn't unduly intrusive, much to the dismay of contract scientists at the agency's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, who have challenged the investigations.

I sympathize with the scientists in their quest not to have federal investigators probe their personal lives, but I'm not sure that the following element of their argument -- as expressed by Robert Nelson, the lead plaintiff in the case -- is going to play well either in a court of law or the court of public opinion:

"Regardless of what the legal outcome is, there will be a small number of people who won't be here anymore for reasons not having to do with their scientific or technical talent," but who would rather quit than sign the background check waivers, Nelson said.

Knowing that their pasts can be investigated "breeds in people the tendency to conform," he continued. "One reason we think that JPL has been so successful is that we've been so tolerant of people with a wide range of personal idiosyncrasies."