4 ms·

> How is repercussions for criticizing your employer a free speech issue? When your employer is the government, it clearly is. The biggest reason we have free

> How is repercussions for criticizing your employer a free speech issue? When your employer is the government, it clearly is. The biggest reason we have free speech in this country is so that the government cannot punish people for speaking up against it.

redeux 3y ago
> The biggest reason we have free speech in this country is so that the government cannot punish people for speaking up against it. I’d go a step further and say it’s the only reason since the first amendment only applies to government retaliation.
vel0city 3y ago
The government can punish employees when the speech is pursuant to their position as a public employee. A DMV worker saying "lets go Brandon" to everyone coming through the door while they're at the desk is not protected speech. That DMV worker getting off the clock and attending a Trump rally is. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garcetti_v._Ceballos https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garcetti_v._Ceballos
rayiner 3y ago
That doesn’t mean that government employers must allow employees to say whatever they want: https://www.acludc.org/en/know-your-rights/federal-employee-speech-first-amendment https://www.acludc.org/en/know-your-rights/federal-employee-... For public employee speech to be protected, you must be speaking: > 1) as a private citizen, > 2) about a matter of public concern, and > 3) your speech does not interfere with your job A government-employed lecturer speaking within the scope of her lecture isn’t speaking in a private capacity, hence it’s not a free speech issue.
- dctoedt 3y ago
  Horses for courses, as the Brits say. Here we had a government-employed professional who publicly (and mildly) expressed disagreement with another, high-ranking public servant on the merits of an issue of public concern — in a field in which the academic is something of an expert and the other public servant is ... not. That's a whole different kettle of fish than, say, a DMV employee greeting people at the counter with "Let's Go Brandon" (from a comment elsewhere in this thread).
  - rayiner 3y ago
    But she wasn't speaking as a private citizen. She was delivering a lecture purchased and paid for by the government.
    - dctoedt 3y ago
      > She was delivering a lecture purchased and paid for by the government. If that's to be the standard, what effect do you think it will have on the hiring desirable faculty by state universities in red states? I'm already seeing reports of trouble in that regard.

redeux 3y ago

> The biggest reason we have free speech in this country is so that the government cannot punish people for speaking up against it. I’d go a step further and say it’s the only reason since the first amendment only applies to government retaliation.

vel0city 3y ago

The government can punish employees when the speech is pursuant to their position as a public employee. A DMV worker saying "lets go Brandon" to everyone coming through the door while they're at the desk is not protected speech. That DMV worker getting off the clock and attending a Trump rally is. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garcetti_v._Ceballos https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garcetti_v._Ceballos

rayiner 3y ago

That doesn’t mean that government employers must allow employees to say whatever they want: https://www.acludc.org/en/know-your-rights/federal-employee-speech-first-amendment https://www.acludc.org/en/know-your-rights/federal-employee-... For public employee speech to be protected, you must be speaking: > 1) as a private citizen, > 2) about a matter of public concern, and > 3) your speech does not interfere with your job A government-employed lecturer speaking within the scope of her lecture isn’t speaking in a private capacity, hence it’s not a free speech issue.

dctoedt 3y ago
Horses for courses, as the Brits say. Here we had a government-employed professional who publicly (and mildly) expressed disagreement with another, high-ranking public servant on the merits of an issue of public concern — in a field in which the academic is something of an expert and the other public servant is ... not. That's a whole different kettle of fish than, say, a DMV employee greeting people at the counter with "Let's Go Brandon" (from a comment elsewhere in this thread).
- rayiner 3y ago
  But she wasn't speaking as a private citizen. She was delivering a lecture purchased and paid for by the government.
  - dctoedt 3y ago
    > She was delivering a lecture purchased and paid for by the government. If that's to be the standard, what effect do you think it will have on the hiring desirable faculty by state universities in red states? I'm already seeing reports of trouble in that regard.