Political Speech Protected Even If You Don't Speak

Recently the U.S. Supreme court sided with a former police officer who was demoted by his supervisors for what they believed to be unsolicited political activity off duty. In the 6-2 decision of Heffernan v. City of Paterson which was a dispute over the reach of first amendment for public employees. The main issue here was the that judges had to decide whether the First Amendment shields who aren't engaging in protected political conduct but are "perceived" by their superiors to be doing so. What caused this whole issue was that during a mayoral election in Paterson Heffernan was friends of someone who wished to unseat mayor Jose "Joey" Torres, he was spotted by a member of the mayors security detail picking up a lawn sign not for himself but for his be ridden mother and a day later was demoted to foot patrol for "overt involvement" in a political campaign.

MATT MCCLAIN/THE WASHINGTON POST VIA GETTY IMAGES

What the Supreme Court concluded was that Heffernans First Amendment right didn't rest on whether he was engaged in constitutionally protected political activity. The court decided the constitutional question while there was a big hole in the case: whether Heffernan was punished not for supporting a rival but because of under a "neutral policy prohibiting police officers from overt involvement in any political campaign. With the lack of clarity the case was sent back to the lower court for further proceedings. Justice Clarence Thomas disagreed with the majority stating that he would have ruled "factual impossibility" of suing over the violation of a right you never publicly exercised. It shows that everywhere now you are unable to hide from the First Amendment even when your actions do not end up relating to the First Amendment as you see here with Heffernan.



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/supreme-court-first-amendment-motive_us_571f77ebe4b0b49df6a8f081