The Most Important Public Employment Law Case: Pickering v. Board of Education, 391 U.S. 563 (1968)

When most hear about public employment law, they believe the topic involves unions and collective bargaining between government employers and public employee unions.  This is not correct. Although public-sector labor law is an increasingly important area of inquiry given the robust union movement in the public sector, an equally important area concerns the constitutional rights of public employees.  This is public employment law. It is important area of the law both because only public employees, with a government employer, have the protections of the federal constitution under the state action doctrine and because of the sheer size of the public workforce in this country: currently around 23 million workers or about 17% of all workers in the United States.

So within this specialized area, I believe the most important case is the public employee free speech case of Pickering v. Board of Education, decided by the United States Supreme Court in 1968.  On October 8, 1964, the Board of Education of Township High School District 205 in Will County, Illinois, fired teacher Marvin Pickering for writing a blistering editorial about the Board and Superintendent in the local Lockport Herald on the previous September 24th.  The letter concerned a series of four tax referenda initiated and supported by the Board of Education which sought to allocate tax money for a variety of school-related purposes.  Pickering believed that the Board and Superintendent had bungled the matter and that tax money was better spent on teachers’ salary, funding for school lunches for non-athletes, and educational needs generally.

Not surprisingly, the Lockport School Board viewed Pickering’s public statements as insubordination. 

Continue ReadingThe Most Important Public Employment Law Case: Pickering v. Board of Education, 391 U.S. 563 (1968)

Supreme Court Takes New First Amendment Public Employment Case

4United States Supreme Court 112904 Not exactly Garcetti II, but the United State Supreme Court yeserday granted certiorari in a case involving a ruling affirming a jury verdict for a police chief claiming retaliation under the First Amendment’s Petition Clause.  The case is Duryea v. Guarnieri (No. 09-1476).  (Here is the Third Circuit opinion below and the petition for writ of certiorari).

Although the Borough argues that this case should be handled like other free speech cases and be dismissed because the dispute does not meet the Connick “matter of public concern” test, the police chief argues that there should be different standards applied for Petition Clause claims as opposed to free speech claims.

Interestingly, a similar argument arises over whether the Connick/Pickering/Garcetti framework should apply in association claim cases under the First Amendment. 

Continue ReadingSupreme Court Takes New First Amendment Public Employment Case

NASA v. Nelson and Public Employee Informational Privacy

4United States Supreme Court 112904 Yesterday, the United States Supreme Court heard oral argument in the public employee informational privacy case of NASA v. Nelson (oral tanscript here). Rather than reinvent the wheel on this one, I want to direct reader’s to Prof. Lior Strahilevitz’s (Chicago Law) excellent analysis of the oral argument on PrawfsBlawg.

Here are some highlights: 

Having read the transcript, it seems likely that the Court will reverse the Ninth Circuit and hold that the government may ask open-ended questions as part of a security clearance process for government employees. Beyond that, though, very little is clear . . . .

Continue ReadingNASA v. Nelson and Public Employee Informational Privacy