sexual behavior

In the national security world, ignorance or mistake of law is generally not an excuse for failing to abide by legal obligations. This opinion has been established long ago by appeals board judges in upholding security clearance denials. There are various adjudicative guidelines where claiming ignorance of the rules or

Security clearance holders have an obligation to report all employment outside the scope of the company who sponsored their clearance. This is to ensure there are no conflicts of interest between the activity and companies or government agencies, as well as to identify concerns with foreign interests or other illegal activities. Well,

Two recent Defense Office of Hearing and Appeals (DOHA) cases involved security clearance applicants who had been charged with viewing child pornography, which is a felony offense. Both applicants were denied eligibility for a clearance and on appeal, argued the websites and pictures they had viewed were not considered child pornography even

Many security clearance applicants mistakenly believe that entering into a pretrial intervention (PTI) program with the court in order to get charges dismissed exonerates them and has no bearing on eligibility for a security clearance. This may be so in the private sector or in a criminal law context, but