Search for: ""Garcetti v. Ceballos" OR "547 U.S. 410"" Results 1 - 20 of 69
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
29 Sep 2023, 5:01 am by Eugene Volokh
Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410 (2006), and the damage caused by the speech to the efficiency of the government agency's operation does not outweigh the value of the speech to the employee and the public (the so-called Pickeringbalance). [read post]
18 Aug 2022, 12:30 pm by Public Employment Law Press
Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410. noted that “when public employees make statements pursuant to their official duties ... the Constitution does not insulate their communications from employer discipline. [read post]
18 Aug 2022, 12:30 pm by Public Employment Law Press
Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410. noted that “when public employees make statements pursuant to their official duties ... the Constitution does not insulate their communications from employer discipline. [read post]
10 Jun 2020, 3:55 pm by Eugene Volokh
Ceballos, the Supreme Court upheld the power of non-academic government employers to regulate their employees' speech that is pursuant to their employment duties. 547 U.S. 410, 421 (2006). [read post]
11 Mar 2020, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410 (2006), and Lane v. [read post]
31 Jan 2019, 6:28 am by Second Circuit Civil Rights Blog
Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410 (2006), which holds a public employee does not have speech rights if his speech was uttered pursuant to his official job duties. [read post]
17 Nov 2017, 7:06 am by Second Circuit Civil Rights Blog
Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410 (2006), which says employee speech is not protected under the First Amendment if the employee speaks pursuant to her job duties and does not speak as a citizen. [read post]
22 Oct 2014, 8:30 am by Second Circuit Civil Rights Blog
Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410, 418 (2006), but rather “pursuant to his official duties” as defined by this Court in Weintraub v. [read post]