Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Developments in the Law

Garcetti v. Ceballos and the Workplace Freedom of Speech Rights of Public Employees

Bibliographic Data

ID6358985
AuthorsRobert Roberts (0000-0001-7137-7444, James Madison University, corresponding author)
Year2007
Volume67
Issue4
Pages662-672
Publication date2007-06-09
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenuePublic Administration Review (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0033-3352 • E-ISSN: 1540-6210
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1111/j.1540-6210.2007.00751.x
OpenAlexW2144677843
LanguageEN
Citations received3
References cited6

On May 30, 2006 the Supreme Court handed down a 5–4 decision in the case of Garcetti v. Ceballos, announcing that “when public employees make statements pursuant to their official duties, they are not speaking as citizens for First Amendment purposes, and the Constitution does not insulate their communications from employer discipline.” Previously, the Court had held in Pickering v. Board of Education (1968) that the First Amendment’s protection of freedom of speech generally prohibited public employers from firing or disciplining employees for speaking out on matters of “public concern.” The Pickering decision established a two‐part test that first required federal courts to determine whether the employee had spoken out on a matter of public concern and then whether the disruptive impact of the employee’s statement justified the disciplinary action. This article argues that the Garcetti decision may deter many public employees from disclosing governmental inefficiency and misconduct and presenting dissenting viewpoints on matters of clear public concern. Consequently, the decision may make it more difficult for the leadership of public agencies to uncover inefficiency and misconduct

Constitution · Constitutionality · Dissenting opinion · First amendment · Misconduct · Political science · Supreme court · Viewpoints · Business Law and Ethics · Law · Law, Rights, and Freedoms · Legal Systems and Judicial Processes

  • Studying Methods, Not Ethics

    Patrick Von Maravić•Public Integrity•2008

  • Madison’s Ratchet

    Open Access•David H Rosenbloom, Stephanie P Newbold et al.•The American Review of Public…•2017

  • Guerrilla Statesmanship

    Open Access•Chad B Newswander•Public Administration Review•2014

  • The Possibility of Administrative Ethics

    D F Thompson•Public Administration Review•1985

  • Public Personnel Administration and the Constitution

    David H Rosenbloom•Public Administration Review•1975

  • The Emerging Doctrine of Privilege in Public Employment

    Arch Dotson•Public Administration Review•1955

  • Public Personnel Administration by Lawsuit

    Don Jaegal, N Joseph Cayer•Public Administration Review•1991

  • First Amendment Rights of Government Employees

    Stephen L Hayford•Public Administration Review•1985

Citations per year0.17
Citation span2008 - 2017 (10)
Highly citedNo

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae