Block, SkipCaptcha, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
5,655
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 29:
Line 29: + + + + + + + +
no edit summary
===Free Speech===
===Free Speech===
Sotomayor appears to believe in a strong right to free speech.
Sotomayor dissented in '''Pappas v. Giuliani, 290 F.3d 143, 155 (2d Cir. N.Y. 2002)'''
<blockquote>
"The Court holds that the government does not violate the First Amendment when it fires a police department employee for racially inflammatory speech -- where the speech consists of mailings in which the employee did not identify himself, let alone connect himself to the police department; where the speech occurred away from the office and on the employee's own time; where the employee's position involved no policymaking authority or public contact; where there is virtually no evidence of workplace disruption resulting directly from the speech; and where it ultimately required the investigatory resources of two police departments to bring the speech to the attention of the community. Precedent requires us to consider these factors as we apply the Pickering balancing test, and each counsels against granting summary judgment in favor of the police department employer. To be sure, I find the speech in this case patently offensive, hateful, and insulting. The Court should not, however, gloss over three decades of jurisprudence and the centrality of First Amendment freedoms in our lives because it is confronted with speech it does not like and because a government employer fears a potential public response that it alone precipitated."
</blockquote>
==References==
==References==
<references/>
<references/>