The document discusses freedom of speech protections for teachers and other public employees. It outlines key Supreme Court rulings like Pickering v. Board of Education and Connick v. Myers that established teachers have some but not unlimited free speech rights. The document also presents a three-part test used to determine if a public employee's speech is legally protected: (1) it must involve a matter of public concern, (2) the employee's interest in commenting must outweigh the employer's efficiency interests, and (3) the speech must have motivated the discharge decision.

1. William Allan Kritsonis, PhD

2. •Freedom of Speech is entrenched in our United
States Constitution with the addition of the ‘Bill
of Rights’.
•Speech and the freedom thereof were and still
is such an important component that the
forefathers and thus “Framers” of the Constitution
placed it in the first amendment of the Bill of
Rights.

3. What degree of “free speech” do
employees have?
 Do Teachers have the rights of free
speech?
 To what degree of autonomy do
teachers have and what are the
repercussions?
 Should teachers not adhere to
decorum?

4. First Amendment
 Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of
religion, or prohibiting the free
exercise thereof; or abridging the
freedom of speech, or of the press;
or the right of the people peaceably
to assemble, and to petition the
Government for a redress of
grievances .

5. Fourteenth Amendment
 All persons born or naturalized in the
United States, and subject to the
jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the
United States and of the State wherein
they reside. No State shall make or
enforce any law which shall abridge the
privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any State
deprive any person of life, liberty, or
property, without due process of law; nor
deny to any person within its jurisdiction
the equal protection of the laws.

6. Equal Protection and Due Process
 Statesdo have to be
subordinate and subservient
to Federal guidelines,
especially in the arena of
‘Equal Protection’ and ‘Due
Process’.

7. Pickering v. Board of Education
 US Supreme Court ruling overturning both
local school board and lower court decision.
 This specific case involved a teacher who
was dismissed from his job for sending a
letter critical of the school board to a local
newspaper.
 This specific case asserted the precedent
that some aspects of speech are protected.

8. Pickering v. Board of Education
cont.
 Although the case did protect certain aspects of
speech it did not state that teachers have
unrestricted rights of expression.
 Justice Thurgood Marshall in writing the opinion
for the court stated “has interests as an
employer in regulating the speech of its
employees that differ significantly from those it
possesses in connection with regulation of the
speech of the citizenry in general.”

9. Nieto v. San Perlita I.S.D
 The Nieto case involved a supervisor that
was fired after making allegations that a
coach was abusing students.
 The court ruled that Nieto’s speech was of
public concern but the public interest was
outweighed by the districts interest in
“promoting the public services it performs.”
 Nieto’s dismissal was upheld.

10. Connick v. Myers
 This Supreme Court case handed down a
ruling based on a case of expression in
New Orleans.
 An assistant district attorney was
terminated after being informed that she
would be transferred and then she
circulated a questionnaire addressing
office operations and policies.

11. Connick v. Myers cont.
 A federal district court and a court of
appeals ruled in favor of Myers.
 Reversing the decision the high court
ruled that an employee’s speech is
protected when an employee speaks as a
citizen on matters of public concern but
not when he/she only speaks of matter of
personal interest.

12. Protected Speech Three Part Test
 1.) The speech must have involved a matter of
public concern.
 2.) The public employee’s interest in
commenting on matters of public concern must
outweigh the employer’s interest in promoting
efficiency.
 3.) The third prong of the test is based on
causation; the employee’s speech must have
motivated the decision to discharge the
employee.