Search for: "Pickering v. State"
Results 81 - 100
of 426
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Nov 2008, 7:57 am
See, e.g., United States v. [read post]
22 Sep 2009, 11:59 am
Kirby in Barker v. [read post]
10 Dec 2018, 4:00 am
Singer v. [read post]
10 Dec 2018, 4:00 am
Singer v. [read post]
Fourth Circuit Rules Against North Carolina State Professor Who Spoke Out Against Diversity Policies
8 Jul 2023, 4:26 am
In that way, the court avoids the necessity of applying the balancing test under Pickering v. [read post]
9 Sep 2013, 12:05 pm
” In addition, under the prior Supreme Court case Pickering v. [read post]
15 Nov 2010, 3:52 am
Myers, 461 U.S. 138 (1983), and Pickering v. [read post]
20 Jun 2011, 8:12 am
United States, 470 U. [read post]
15 Aug 2022, 5:01 am
Pickering v. [read post]
23 Jan 2015, 8:55 am
” The social media posts, therefore, did not meet the threshold requirement established by Pickering v. [read post]
29 Nov 2010, 6:42 am
Chamber of Commerce of the United States, et al. v. [read post]
25 Oct 2011, 3:16 am
In such a type of case, said the court, "[t]he problem ... is to arrive at a balance between the interests of the [employee] as a citizen, in commenting upon matters of public concern and the interest of the State, as an employer, in promoting the efficiency of the public services it performs through its employees," quoting from Pickering v Board of Education, 391 US 563. [read post]
21 Jun 2011, 6:40 am
The big news from the Supreme Court yesterday was the highly anticipated decision in Wal-Mart v. [read post]
26 May 2008, 9:43 am
Allen (Stetson University College of Law) has published “Of Remedies, Juries and State Regulation of Punitive Damages: The Significance of Philip Morris v. [read post]
1 Jan 2011, 2:02 pm
The Nevada Supreme Court has upheld an earlier ruling in Bahena v. [read post]
14 Feb 2018, 6:58 am
Ceballos, including oral argument recordings Supreme Court's 1968 opinion in Pickering v. [read post]
10 Sep 2012, 2:11 pm
” The Circuit Court explained: “In the First Amendment context, ‘the State 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,’" citing Pickering v. [read post]
20 Dec 2017, 11:57 am
For example, the principle on which Abood rests — that government has significant leeway in its dealings with citizen employees — also supports the rule of Pickering v. [read post]
6 Jul 2023, 1:04 pm
As a consequence, such speech is entirely unprotected by the First Amendment and does not even reach the balancing test under Pickering v. [read post]
29 Nov 2006, 11:51 pm
This state of affairs could now mean that public employers could gain constitutional rights at the expense of pubic employees. [read post]
