Both Bowie and Jackler, when compared with a wide variety of public employee free speech case law, stand out as cases where a public employee is not seeking protection of his right to speak, but rather, is seeking protection of the right not to speak falsely or protection of the right to refrain from speaking at all. This Summary seeks to review the progression of public employee case law up to Garcetti and then discusses Garcetti\u27s effect on subsequent circuit decisions attempting to apply its standards. Next, a review of the ineffectiveness of current whistleblower protection laws suggests that employees without First Amendment protection have little protection at all. Finally, it is suggested that Garcetti did not anticipate its holdi...
In 1968, the United States Supreme Court determined it was illegal for public employers to retaliate...
The article presents an analysis on the advancement of public employee speech and interpretations of...
This essay, to be published in the First Amendment Law Review\u27s forthcoming symposium issue on Pu...
Both Bowie and Jackler, when compared with a wide variety of public employee free speech case law, s...
Resolving a circuit split, the Supreme Court declared in Garcetti v. Ceballos that the First Amendme...
Garcetti v. Ceballos does nothing less than redefine the whole conception of what role public employ...
Before the United States Supreme Court decided Garcetti v. Ceballos in 2006, courts decided the ques...
In Garcetti v. Ceballos, the Supreme Court denied constitutional protection to a deputy prosecutor n...
In Garcetti v. Ceballos, the Supreme Court held that public employees have no First Amendment protec...
The U.S. Supreme Court recently held in Garcetti v. Ceballos that government employees are not prote...
In Lane v. Franks, the U.S. Supreme Court held that public employees who give truthful testimony in ...
In Garcetti v. Ceballos, the U.S. Supreme Court, by the narrowest of margins, held that allegations ...
In this article, I use the 2014 decision of Lane v. Franks as a jumping off point to revisit the rul...
With its decision in Garcetti v. Ceballos in 2006, the Supreme Court significantly limited First Ame...
This article reviews the Supreme Court’s rulings in public employee free speech cases, discusses the...
In 1968, the United States Supreme Court determined it was illegal for public employers to retaliate...
The article presents an analysis on the advancement of public employee speech and interpretations of...
This essay, to be published in the First Amendment Law Review\u27s forthcoming symposium issue on Pu...
Both Bowie and Jackler, when compared with a wide variety of public employee free speech case law, s...
Resolving a circuit split, the Supreme Court declared in Garcetti v. Ceballos that the First Amendme...
Garcetti v. Ceballos does nothing less than redefine the whole conception of what role public employ...
Before the United States Supreme Court decided Garcetti v. Ceballos in 2006, courts decided the ques...
In Garcetti v. Ceballos, the Supreme Court denied constitutional protection to a deputy prosecutor n...
In Garcetti v. Ceballos, the Supreme Court held that public employees have no First Amendment protec...
The U.S. Supreme Court recently held in Garcetti v. Ceballos that government employees are not prote...
In Lane v. Franks, the U.S. Supreme Court held that public employees who give truthful testimony in ...
In Garcetti v. Ceballos, the U.S. Supreme Court, by the narrowest of margins, held that allegations ...
In this article, I use the 2014 decision of Lane v. Franks as a jumping off point to revisit the rul...
With its decision in Garcetti v. Ceballos in 2006, the Supreme Court significantly limited First Ame...
This article reviews the Supreme Court’s rulings in public employee free speech cases, discusses the...
In 1968, the United States Supreme Court determined it was illegal for public employers to retaliate...
The article presents an analysis on the advancement of public employee speech and interpretations of...
This essay, to be published in the First Amendment Law Review\u27s forthcoming symposium issue on Pu...