Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Reply Brief. Crouse V. Caldwell, 138 S.Ct. 470 (2017) (No. 17-242), Eric Schnapper, Steven H. Goldblatt, Shon Hopwood, Marybeth Mullaney, Jennifer Munter Stark
Reply Brief. Crouse V. Caldwell, 138 S.Ct. 470 (2017) (No. 17-242), Eric Schnapper, Steven H. Goldblatt, Shon Hopwood, Marybeth Mullaney, Jennifer Munter Stark
Court Briefs
QUESTIONS PRESENTED (1) When disputes of fact arise regarding whether speech by a public employee is protected by the First Amendment, should those factual issues be resolved by a trier of fact (the rule in the Second, Third, Sixth, Eighth and Tenth Circuits), or by the court as a matter of constitutional law (the rule in the Fourth Circuit)? (2) When a government employee engages in speech on a subject of public concern, and a court applying Pickering balances the First Amendment interest against any contrary interests of the employer, should the extent of that First Amendment interest be “lessened” …
Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari, Crouse V. Caldwell, 138 S.Ct. 470 (2017) (No. 17-242), Eric Schnapper, Steven H. Goldblatt, Shon Hopwood, Marybeth Mullaney, Jennifer Munter Stark
Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari, Crouse V. Caldwell, 138 S.Ct. 470 (2017) (No. 17-242), Eric Schnapper, Steven H. Goldblatt, Shon Hopwood, Marybeth Mullaney, Jennifer Munter Stark
Court Briefs
QUESTIONS PRESENTED (1) When disputes of fact arise regarding whether speech by a public employee is protected by the First Amendment, should those factual issues be resolved by a trier of fact (the rule in the Second, Third, Sixth, Eighth and Tenth Circuits), or by the court as a matter of constitutional law (the rule in the Fourth Circuit)? (2) When a government employee engages in speech on a subject of public concern, and a court applying Pickering balances the First Amendment interest against any contrary interests of the employer, should the extent of that First Amendment interest be “lessened” …
Brief For Respondent. Madigan V. Levin, 571 U.S. 1 (2013) (No. 12-872), 2013 U.S. S. Ct. Briefs Lexis 3187, Eric Schnapper, Harvey Levin, Edward Theobald
Brief For Respondent. Madigan V. Levin, 571 U.S. 1 (2013) (No. 12-872), 2013 U.S. S. Ct. Briefs Lexis 3187, Eric Schnapper, Harvey Levin, Edward Theobald
Court Briefs
No abstract provided.
Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari. Opp V. Office Of The State's Attorney Of Cook County, 565 U.S. 815 (2011) (No. 10-1163), 2011 U.S. Lexis 6893, Eric Schnapper, Brian R. Holman, Dennis H. Stefanowicz, Tara Beth Davis, Susan Bogart
Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari. Opp V. Office Of The State's Attorney Of Cook County, 565 U.S. 815 (2011) (No. 10-1163), 2011 U.S. Lexis 6893, Eric Schnapper, Brian R. Holman, Dennis H. Stefanowicz, Tara Beth Davis, Susan Bogart
Court Briefs
QUESTION PRESENTED Five major federal employment statutes, including in this case the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, exclude certain government workers "at the policymaking level" from the definition of employees protected by those laws. The question presented is: who is a worker "on the policymaking level"?