Search for: "Garcetti v. Ceballos" Results 121 - 140 of 265
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Jul 2012, 5:45 am
Citing Garcetti v Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410, the Circuit Court explained that "[W]hen public employees make statements pursuant to their official duties, the employees are not speaking as citizens for First Amendment purposes, and the Constitution does not insulate their communications from employer discipline. [read post]
18 May 2012, 9:57 am by Howard Wasserman
I actually noticed something similar in discussions of Garcetti v. [read post]
17 May 2012, 2:17 am
The latter was the issue in the Thomas case: Was Thomas’s report to the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation (OSBI) made pursuant to his professional duties and therefore outside the scope of First Amendment protections within the meaning of Garcetti v Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410, or was his speech a matter of public interest and thus protected by the First Amendment? [read post]
23 Mar 2012, 6:11 am by Daniel Schwartz
First, the court doesn’t undertake any type of analysis under Garcetti v. [read post]
20 Mar 2012, 8:00 am by Second Circuit Civil Rights Blog
Ceballos, a 2006 Supreme Court ruling that has nearly wiped out these cases under its holding that speech is not protected if the plaintiff makes it pursuant to his official job duties.The case is Ricciuti v. [read post]
19 Mar 2012, 5:14 am by laborprof lpb
Kermit Roosevelt III, Not as Bad as You Think: Why Garcetti v. [read post]
27 Feb 2012, 9:23 am by Lyle Denniston
.,  to further clarify its decision five years ago in Garcetti v. [read post]