Garcetti v. Ceballos
- Decided
- May 30, 2006
- Docket
- 04-473
- Status
- Published
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
Cited 2,871 timesNo negative treatment found in this library
What later courts said
- holding that statements made by current public employees pursuant to their official duties, rather than as citizens, are not protected by the First Amendment — Wilson v. Central Intelligence Agency (2009)
- holding that employee does not speak as a private citizen when his speech is “pursuant to [his] official duties” — Bobby Bland v. B. Roberts (2013)
- holding that when “public employees make statements pursuant to their official duties, the employees are not speaking as citizens for First Amendment purposes” — Adis M. Vila v. Eduardo J. Padron (2007)
Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.
How the opinion begins
[*413] Justice Kennedy delivered the opinion of the Court.
It is well settled that “a State cannot condition public employment on a basis that infringes the employee’s constitutionally protected interest in freedom of expression.” Connick v. Myers, 461 U. S. 138, 142 (1983). The question presented by the instant case is whether the First Amendment protects a government employee from discipline based on speech made pursuant to the employee’s official duties.
I
Statutes cited
Cite this
Garcetti v. Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410 (2006)Read the full opinion
Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.