garcetti
et
al
ceballos
argued
october
decided
may
respondent
ceballos
supervising
deputy
district
attorney
asked
defense
counsel
review
case
counsel
claimed
affidavit
police
used
obtain
critical
search
warrant
inaccurate
concluding
review
affidavit
made
serious
misrepresentations
ceballos
relayed
findings
supervisors
petitioners
followed
disposition
memorandum
recommending
dismissal
petitioners
nevertheless
proceeded
prosecution
hearing
defense
motion
challenge
warrant
ceballos
recounted
observations
affidavit
trial
rejected
challenge
claiming
petitioners
retaliated
memo
violation
first
fourteenth
amendments
ceballos
filed
suit
district
granted
petitioners
summary
judgment
ruling
inter
alia
memo
protected
speech
ceballos
wrote
pursuant
employment
duties
reversing
ninth
circuit
held
memo
allegations
protected
first
amendment
analysis
pickering
board
ed
township
high
school
dist
connick
myers
held
public
employees
make
statements
pursuant
official
duties
speaking
citizens
first
amendment
purposes
constitution
insulate
communications
employer
discipline
pp
two
inquiries
guide
interpretation
constitutional
protections
accorded
public
employee
speech
first
requires
determining
whether
employee
spoke
citizen
matter
public
concern
see
pickering
supra
answer
employee
first
amendment
cause
action
based
employer
reaction
speech
see
connick
supra
answer
yes
possibility
first
amendment
claim
arises
question
becomes
whether
government
employer
adequate
justification
treating
employee
differently
member
general
public
see
pickering
supra
consideration
reflects
importance
relationship
speaker
expressions
employment
without
significant
degree
control
employees
words
actions
government
employer
little
chance
provide
public
services
efficiently
cf
connick
supra
thus
government
entity
broader
discretion
restrict
speech
acts
employer
role
restrictions
imposes
must
directed
speech
potential
affect
operations
hand
citizen
works
government
nonetheless
still
citizen
first
amendment
limits
public
employer
ability
leverage
employment
relationship
restrict
incidentally
intentionally
liberties
employees
enjoy
capacities
private
citizens
see
perry
sindermann
long
employees
speaking
citizens
matters
public
concern
must
face
speech
restrictions
necessary
employers
operate
efficiently
effectively
see
connick
supra
pp
proper
application
precedents
leads
conclusion
first
amendment
prohibit
managerial
discipline
based
employee
expressions
made
pursuant
official
responsibilities
ceballos
memo
falls
category
allegation
unconstitutional
retaliation
must
fail
dispositive
factor
ceballos
expressed
views
inside
office
rather
publicly
see
givhan
western
line
consol
school
memo
concerned
subject
matter
employment
see
pickering
result
consistent
prior
emphasis
potential
societal
value
employee
speech
affording
government
employers
sufficient
discretion
manage
operations
ceballos
proposed
contrary
rule
adopted
ninth
circuit
commit
state
federal
courts
new
permanent
intrusive
role
mandating
judicial
oversight
communications
among
government
employees
superiors
course
official
business
displacement
managerial
discretion
judicial
supervision
finds
support
precedents
doctrinal
anomaly
appeals
perceived
compelling
public
employers
tolerate
certain
employee
speech
made
publicly
speech
made
pursuant
employee
assigned
duties
misconceives
theoretical
underpinnings
decisions
unfounded
practical
matter
pp
exposing
governmental
inefficiency
misconduct
matter
considerable
significance
various
measures
adopted
protect
employees
provide
checks
supervisors
order
unlawful
otherwise
inappropriate
actions
include
federal
state
protection
laws
labor
codes
government
attorneys
rules
conduct
constitutional
obligations
apart
first
amendment
however
precedents
support
existence
constitutional
cause
action
behind
every
statement
public
employee
makes
course
job
pp
reversed
remanded
kennedy
delivered
opinion
roberts
scalia
thomas
alito
joined
stevens
filed
dissenting
opinion
souter
filed
dissenting
opinion
stevens
ginsburg
joined
breyer
filed
dissenting
opinion
gil
garcetti
et
petitioners
richard
ceballos
writ
certiorari
appeals
ninth
circuit
may
justice
kennedy
delivered
opinion
well
settled
state
condition
public
employment
basis
infringes
employee
constitutionally
protected
interest
freedom
expression
connick
myers
question
presented
instant
case
whether
first
amendment
protects
government
employee
discipline
based
speech
made
pursuant
employee
official
duties
respondent
richard
ceballos
employed
since
deputy
district
attorney
los
angeles
county
district
attorney
office
period
relevant
case
ceballos
calendar
deputy
office
pomona
branch
capacity
exercised
certain
supervisory
responsibilities
lawyers
february
defense
attorney
contacted
ceballos
pending
criminal
case
defense
attorney
said
inaccuracies
affidavit
used
obtain
critical
search
warrant
attorney
informed
ceballos
filed
motion
traverse
challenge
warrant
also
wanted
ceballos
review
case
according
ceballos
unusual
defense
attorneys
ask
calendar
deputies
investigate
aspects
pending
cases
examining
affidavit
visiting
location
described
ceballos
determined
affidavit
contained
serious
misrepresentations
affidavit
called
long
driveway
ceballos
thought
referred
separate
roadway
ceballos
also
questioned
affidavit
statement
tire
tracks
led
truck
premises
covered
warrant
doubts
arose
conclusion
roadway
composition
places
made
difficult
impossible
leave
visible
tire
tracks
ceballos
spoke
telephone
warrant
affiant
deputy
sheriff
los
angeles
county
sheriff
department
receive
satisfactory
explanation
perceived
inaccuracies
relayed
findings
supervisors
petitioners
carol
najera
frank
sundstedt
followed
preparing
disposition
memorandum
memo
explained
ceballos
concerns
recommended
dismissal
case
march
ceballos
submitted
memo
sundstedt
review
days
later
ceballos
presented
sundstedt
another
memo
one
describing
second
telephone
conversation
ceballos
warrant
affiant
based
ceballos
statements
meeting
held
discuss
affidavit
attendees
included
ceballos
sundstedt
najera
well
warrant
affiant
employees
sheriff
department
meeting
allegedly
became
heated
one
lieutenant
sharply
criticizing
ceballos
handling
case
despite
ceballos
concerns
sundstedt
decided
proceed
prosecution
pending
disposition
defense
motion
traverse
trial
held
hearing
motion
ceballos
called
defense
recounted
observations
affidavit
trial
rejected
challenge
warrant
ceballos
claims
aftermath
events
subjected
series
retaliatory
employment
actions
actions
included
reassignment
calendar
deputy
position
trial
deputy
position
transfer
another
courthouse
denial
promotion
ceballos
initiated
employment
grievance
grievance
denied
based
finding
suffered
retaliation
unsatisfied
ceballos
sued
district
central
district
california
asserting
relevant
claim
rev
stat
alleged
petitioners
violated
first
fourteenth
amendments
retaliating
based
memo
march
petitioners
responded
retaliatory
actions
taken
ceballos
actions
complained
explained
legitimate
reasons
staffing
needs
contended
event
ceballos
memo
protected
speech
first
amendment
petitioners
moved
summary
judgment
district
granted
motion
noting
ceballos
wrote
memo
pursuant
employment
duties
concluded
entitled
first
amendment
protection
memo
contents
held
alternative
even
ceballos
speech
constitutionally
protected
petitioners
qualified
immunity
rights
ceballos
asserted
clearly
established
appeals
ninth
circuit
reversed
holding
ceballos
allegations
wrongdoing
memorandum
constitute
protected
speech
first
amendment
reaching
conclusion
looked
first
amendment
analysis
set
forth
pickering
board
ed
township
high
school
dist
connick
connick
instructs
courts
begin
considering
whether
expressions
question
made
speaker
citizen
upon
matters
public
concern
see
appeals
determined
ceballos
memo
recited
thought
governmental
misconduct
inherently
matter
public
concern
however
consider
whether
speech
made
ceballos
capacity
citizen
rather
relied
circuit
precedent
rejecting
idea
public
employee
speech
deprived
first
amendment
protection
whenever
views
expressed
government
workers
others
pursuant
employment
responsibility
citing
cases
including
roth
veteran
admin
govt
concluded
ceballos
memo
satisfied
requirement
appeals
proceeded
balance
ceballos
interest
speech
supervisors
interest
responding
see
pickering
supra
struck
balance
ceballos
favor
noting
petitioners
failed
even
suggest
disruption
inefficiency
workings
district
attorney
office
result
memo
see
concluded
ceballos
first
amendment
rights
clearly
established
petitioners
actions
objectively
reasonable
see
judge
specially
concurred
agreeing
panel
decision
compelled
circuit
precedent
nevertheless
concluded
circuit
law
revisited
overruled
see
judge
emphasized
distinction
speech
offered
public
employee
acting
employee
carrying
ordinary
job
duties
spoken
employee
acting
citizen
expressing
personal
views
disputed
matters
public
import
view
public
employees
speak
course
carrying
routine
required
employment
obligations
personal
interest
content
speech
gives
rise
first
amendment
right
granted
certiorari
reverse
ii
decisions
noted
many
years
unchallenged
dogma
public
employee
right
object
conditions
placed
upon
terms
employment
including
restricted
exercise
constitutional
rights
connick
treasury
employees
pickering
provides
useful
starting
point
explaining
doctrine
relevant
speech
teacher
letter
local
newspaper
addressing
issues
including
funding
policies
school
board
problem
case
stated
arrive
balance
interests
teacher
citizen
commenting
upon
matters
public
concern
interest
state
employer
promoting
efficiency
public
services
performs
employees
found
teacher
speech
neither
shown
presumed
way
either
impeded
teacher
proper
performance
daily
duties
classroom
interfered
regular
operation
schools
generally
omitted
thus
concluded
interest
school
administration
limiting
teachers
opportunities
contribute
public
debate
significantly
greater
interest
limiting
similar
contribution
member
general
public
pickering
cases
decided
wake
identify
two
inquiries
guide
interpretation
constitutional
protections
accorded
public
employee
speech
first
requires
determining
whether
employee
spoke
citizen
matter
public
concern
see
answer
employee
first
amendment
cause
action
based
employer
reaction
speech
see
connick
supra
answer
yes
possibility
first
amendment
claim
arises
question
becomes
whether
relevant
government
entity
adequate
justification
treating
employee
differently
member
general
public
see
pickering
consideration
reflects
importance
relationship
speaker
expressions
employment
government
entity
broader
discretion
restrict
speech
acts
role
employer
restrictions
imposes
must
directed
speech
potential
affect
entity
operations
sure
conducting
inquiries
sometimes
proved
difficult
necessary
product
enormous
variety
fact
situations
critical
statements
teachers
public
employees
may
thought
superiors
furnish
grounds
dismissal
overarching
objectives
though
evident
citizen
enters
government
service
citizen
necessity
must
accept
certain
limitations
freedom
see
waters
churchill
plurality
opinion
government
employer
indeed
far
broader
powers
government
sovereign
government
employers
like
private
employers
need
significant
degree
control
employees
words
actions
without
little
chance
efficient
provision
public
services
cf
connick
supra
overnment
offices
function
every
employment
decision
became
constitutional
matter
public
employees
moreover
often
occupy
trusted
positions
society
speak
express
views
contravene
governmental
policies
impair
proper
performance
governmental
functions
time
recognized
citizen
works
government
nonetheless
citizen
first
amendment
limits
ability
public
employer
leverage
employment
relationship
restrict
incidentally
intentionally
liberties
employees
enjoy
capacities
private
citizens
see
perry
sindermann
long
employees
speaking
citizens
matters
public
concern
must
face
speech
restrictions
necessary
employers
operate
efficiently
effectively
see
connick
supra
responsibility
ensure
citizens
deprived
fundamental
rights
virtue
working
government
jurisprudence
protects
course
constitutional
rights
public
employees
yet
first
amendment
interests
stake
extend
beyond
individual
speaker
acknowledged
importance
promoting
public
interest
receiving
views
government
employees
engaging
civic
discussion
pickering
provides
instructive
example
characterized
holding
rejecting
attempt
school
administrators
limi
teachers
opportunities
contribute
public
debate
per
curiam
public
employees
able
speak
operation
employers
community
deprived
informed
opinions
important
public
issues
interest
stake
much
public
interest
receiving
informed
opinion
employee
right
disseminate
citation
omitted
cf
treasury
employees
disincentive
government
employees
expression
also
imposes
significant
burden
public
right
read
hear
employees
otherwise
written
said
decisions
sought
promote
individual
societal
interests
served
employees
speak
citizens
matters
public
concern
respect
needs
government
employers
attempting
perform
important
public
functions
see
rankin
recognizing
dual
role
public
employer
provider
public
services
government
entity
operating
constraints
first
amendment
underlying
cases
premise
first
amendment
invests
public
employees
certain
rights
empower
constitutionalize
employee
grievance
connick
iii
principles
mind
turn
instant
case
respondent
ceballos
believed
affidavit
used
obtain
search
warrant
contained
serious
misrepresentations
conveyed
opinion
recommendation
memo
supervisor
ceballos
expressed
views
inside
office
rather
publicly
dispositive
employees
cases
may
receive
first
amendment
protection
expressions
made
work
see
givhan
western
line
consol
school
many
citizens
much
talking
inside
respective
workplaces
serve
goal
treating
public
employees
like
member
general
public
pickering
hold
speech
within
office
automatically
exposed
restriction
memo
concerned
subject
matter
ceballos
employment
nondispositive
first
amendment
protects
expressions
related
speaker
job
see
ibid
givhan
supra
noted
pickering
teachers
class
members
community
likely
informed
definite
opinions
funds
allotted
operation
schools
spent
accordingly
essential
able
speak
freely
questions
without
fear
retaliatory
dismissal
true
many
categories
public
employees
controlling
factor
ceballos
case
expressions
made
pursuant
duties
calendar
deputy
see
brief
respondent
ceballos
dispute
prepared
memorandum
duties
consideration
fact
ceballos
spoke
prosecutor
fulfilling
responsibility
advise
supervisor
best
proceed
pending
case
distinguishes
ceballos
case
first
amendment
provides
protection
discipline
hold
public
employees
make
statements
pursuant
official
duties
employees
speaking
citizens
first
amendment
purposes
constitution
insulate
communications
employer
discipline
ceballos
wrote
disposition
memo
part
calendar
deputy
employed
immaterial
whether
experienced
personal
gratification
writing
memo
first
amendment
rights
depend
job
satisfaction
significant
point
memo
written
pursuant
ceballos
official
duties
restricting
speech
owes
existence
public
employee
professional
responsibilities
infringe
liberties
employee
might
enjoyed
private
citizen
simply
reflects
exercise
employer
control
employer
commissioned
created
cf
rosenberger
rector
visitors
univ
hen
government
appropriates
public
funds
promote
particular
policy
entitled
say
wishes
contrast
example
expressions
made
speaker
pickering
whose
letter
newspaper
official
significance
bore
similarities
letters
submitted
numerous
citizens
every
day
ceballos
act
citizen
went
conducting
daily
professional
activities
supervising
attorneys
investigating
charges
preparing
filings
way
speak
citizen
writing
memo
addressed
proper
disposition
pending
criminal
case
went
work
performed
tasks
paid
perform
ceballos
acted
government
employee
fact
duties
sometimes
required
speak
write
mean
supervisors
prohibited
evaluating
performance
result
consistent
precedents
attention
potential
societal
value
employee
speech
see
supra
refusing
recognize
first
amendment
claims
based
government
employees
work
product
prevent
participating
public
debate
employees
retain
prospect
constitutional
protection
contributions
civic
discourse
prospect
protection
however
invest
right
perform
jobs
however
see
fit
holding
likewise
supported
emphasis
precedents
affording
government
employers
sufficient
discretion
manage
operations
employers
heightened
interests
controlling
speech
made
employee
professional
capacity
official
communications
official
consequences
creating
need
substantive
consistency
clarity
supervisors
must
ensure
employees
official
communications
accurate
demonstrate
sound
judgment
promote
employer
mission
ceballos
memo
illustrative
demanded
attention
supervisors
led
heated
meeting
employees
sheriff
department
ceballos
superiors
thought
memo
inflammatory
misguided
authority
take
proper
corrective
action
ceballos
proposed
contrary
rule
adopted
appeals
commit
state
federal
courts
new
permanent
intrusive
role
mandating
judicial
oversight
communications
among
government
employees
superiors
course
official
business
displacement
managerial
discretion
judicial
supervision
finds
support
precedents
employee
speaks
citizen
addressing
matter
public
concern
first
amendment
requires
delicate
balancing
competing
interests
surrounding
speech
consequences
however
employee
simply
performing
job
duties
warrant
similar
degree
scrutiny
hold
otherwise
demand
permanent
judicial
intervention
conduct
governmental
operations
degree
inconsistent
sound
principles
federalism
separation
powers
appeals
based
holding
part
perceived
doctrinal
anomaly
suggested
inconsistent
compel
public
employers
tolerate
certain
employee
speech
made
publicly
speech
made
pursuant
employee
assigned
duties
see
objection
misconceives
theoretical
underpinnings
decisions
employees
make
public
statements
outside
course
performing
official
duties
retain
possibility
first
amendment
protection
kind
activity
engaged
citizens
work
government
goes
writing
letter
local
newspaper
see
pickering
discussing
politics
see
rankin
public
employee
speaks
pursuant
employment
responsibilities
however
relevant
analogue
speech
citizens
government
employees
appeals
concern
also
unfounded
practical
matter
perceived
anomaly
noted
limited
scope
relates
expressions
employee
makes
pursuant
official
responsibilities
statements
complaints
issue
cases
like
pickering
connick
made
outside
duties
employment
moreover
government
employer
troubled
perceived
anomaly
means
hand
avoid
public
employer
wishes
encourage
employees
voice
concerns
privately
retains
option
instituting
internal
policies
procedures
receptive
employee
criticism
giving
employees
internal
forum
speech
discourage
concluding
safest
avenue
expression
state
views
public
proper
application
precedents
thus
leads
conclusion
first
amendment
prohibit
managerial
discipline
based
employee
expressions
made
pursuant
official
responsibilities
ceballos
memo
falls
category
allegation
unconstitutional
retaliation
must
fail
two
final
points
warrant
mentioning
first
indicated
parties
case
dispute
ceballos
wrote
disposition
memo
pursuant
employment
duties
thus
occasion
articulate
comprehensive
framework
defining
scope
employee
duties
cases
room
serious
debate
reject
however
suggestion
employers
restrict
employees
rights
creating
excessively
broad
job
descriptions
see
post
souter
dissenting
proper
inquiry
practical
one
formal
job
descriptions
often
bear
little
resemblance
duties
employee
actually
expected
perform
listing
given
task
employee
written
job
description
neither
necessary
sufficient
demonstrate
conducting
task
within
scope
employee
professional
duties
first
amendment
purposes
second
justice
souter
suggests
today
decision
may
important
ramifications
academic
freedom
least
constitutional
value
see
post
argument
expression
related
academic
scholarship
classroom
instruction
implicates
additional
constitutional
interests
fully
accounted
customary
jurisprudence
need
reason
decide
whether
analysis
conduct
today
apply
manner
case
involving
speech
related
scholarship
teaching
iv
exposing
governmental
inefficiency
misconduct
matter
considerable
significance
noted
connick
public
employers
matter
good
judgment
receptive
constructive
criticism
offered
employees
imperatives
well
obligations
arising
applicable
constitutional
provisions
mandates
criminal
civil
laws
protect
employees
provide
checks
supervisors
order
unlawful
otherwise
inappropriate
actions
reject
however
notion
first
amendment
shields
discipline
expressions
employees
make
pursuant
professional
duties
precedents
support
existence
constitutional
cause
action
behind
every
statement
public
employee
makes
course
job
judgment
appeals
reversed
case
remanded
proceedings
consistent
opinion
ordered
gil
garcetti
et
petitioners
richard
ceballos
writ
certiorari
appeals
ninth
circuit
may
justice
stevens
dissenting
proper
answer
question
whether
first
amendment
protects
government
employee
discipline
based
speech
made
pursuant
employee
official
duties
ante
sometimes
never
course
supervisor
may
take
corrective
action
speech
inflammatory
misguided
ante
unwelcome
speech
reveals
facts
supervisor
rather
anyone
else
discover
justice
souter
explains
public
employees
still
citizens
office
notion
categorical
difference
speaking
citizen
speaking
course
one
employment
quite
wrong
quarter
century
passed
since
rehnquist
writing
unanimous
rejected
conclusion
public
employee
forfeits
protection
governmental
abridgment
freedom
speech
decides
express
views
privately
rather
publicly
givhan
western
line
consol
school
difficulty
recognizing
first
amendment
applied
bessie
givhan
english
teacher
raised
concerns
school
racist
employment
practices
principal
see
silence
whether
speech
made
pursuant
job
duties
demonstrates
point
immaterial
equally
true
today
senseless
let
constitutional
protection
exactly
words
hinge
whether
fall
within
job
description
moreover
seems
perverse
fashion
new
rule
provides
employees
incentive
voice
concerns
publicly
talking
frankly
superiors
today
novel
conclusion
contrary
may
inflammatory
reasons
stated
justice
souter
dissenting
opinion
surely
misguided
gil
garcetti
et
petitioners
richard
ceballos
writ
certiorari
appeals
ninth
circuit
may
justice
souter
justice
stevens
justice
ginsburg
join
dissenting
holds
public
employees
make
statements
pursuant
official
duties
employees
speaking
citizens
first
amendment
purposes
constitution
insulate
communications
employer
discipline
ante
respectfully
dissent
agree
majority
government
employer
substantial
interests
effectuating
chosen
policy
objectives
demanding
competence
honesty
judgment
employees
speak
work
hold
private
public
interests
addressing
official
wrongdoing
threats
health
safety
outweigh
government
stake
efficient
implementation
policy
public
employees
speak
matters
course
duties
eligible
claim
first
amendment
protection
open
speech
private
citizen
matter
public
importance
lies
heart
expression
subject
protection
first
amendment
see
schenck
network
western
extreme
statement
government
employee
complaining
nothing
beyond
treatment
personnel
rules
raises
greater
claim
constitutional
protection
retaliatory
response
remarks
private
employee
see
connick
myers
points
lies
public
employee
speech
unwelcome
government
significant
public
issue
employee
speaking
citizen
citizen
interest
protected
reprisal
unless
statements
damaging
government
capacity
conduct
public
business
justified
individual
public
benefit
thought
flow
statements
pickering
board
ed
township
high
school
dist
entitlement
protection
thus
absolute
significant
albeit
qualified
protection
public
employees
irritate
government
understood
flow
first
amendment
part
government
paycheck
nothing
eliminate
value
individual
speaking
public
matters
good
reason
categorically
discounting
speaker
interest
commenting
matter
public
concern
government
employs
still
first
amendment
safeguard
rests
something
value
public
receiving
opinions
information
public
employee
may
disclose
government
employees
often
best
position
know
ails
agencies
work
waters
churchill
reason
protection
employee
speech
qualified
distract
supervisors
tasks
hand
thwart
implementation
legitimate
policy
risks
grow
greater
closer
employee
speech
gets
commenting
workplace
responsibilities
one
thing
office
clerk
say
waste
government
quite
another
charge
department
pays
salaries
workers
even
regarded
eligibility
protection
pickering
balancing
proper
approach
employee
speaks
critically
administration
government
employer
givhan
western
line
consol
school
followed
pickering
teacher
fired
complaining
superior
racial
composition
school
administrative
cafeteria
library
staffs
case
decided
part
reference
pickering
framework
held
schoolteacher
speaking
behalf
others
public
school
board
meeting
penalized
criticizing
pending
negotiations
affecting
professional
employment
madison
noted
teacher
addressed
school
board
merely
one
employees
also
concerned
citizen
seeking
express
views
important
decision
government
case
realized
public
employee
wear
citizen
hat
speaking
subjects
closely
tied
employee
job
givhan
stands
conclusion
even
speech
addressed
public
large
cf
pegram
herdrich
recognizing
factually
trustee
employee
retirement
income
security
act
act
erisa
fiduciary
act
behalf
employer
difference
case
like
givhan
one
subject
ceballos
speech
fell
within
scope
job
responsibilities
whereas
choosing
personnel
teacher
hired
effect
majority
constitutional
line
two
cases
givhan
schoolteacher
protected
complaining
principal
hiring
policy
school
personnel
officer
protested
principal
disapproved
hiring
minority
job
applicants
odd
place
draw
necessary
judicial
sometimes
looks
arbitrary
distinction
obliges
justify
choice
adequate
justification
majority
line
categorically
denying
pickering
protection
speech
uttered
pursuant
official
duties
ante
agree
qualified
speech
protection
embodied
pickering
balancing
resolves
tension
individual
public
interests
speech
one
hand
government
interest
operating
efficiently
without
distraction
embarrassment
talkative
employees
need
balance
hardly
disappears
employee
speaks
matters
job
requires
address
rather
seems
obvious
individual
public
value
speech
less
may
well
greater
employee
speaks
pursuant
duties
addressing
subject
knows
intimately
reason
falls
within
importance
speech
individual
stands
reason
citizen
may
well
place
high
value
right
speak
public
issues
decides
make
subject
work
day
day
anyone
doubt
school
principal
evaluating
performance
teachers
promotion
pay
adjustment
retains
citizen
interest
addressing
quality
teaching
schools
still
majority
indicates
fired
without
first
amendment
recourse
fair
unfavorable
comment
teacher
review
superintendent
daughter
anyone
deny
prosecutor
like
richard
ceballos
may
claim
interest
citizen
speaking
rogue
law
enforcement
officer
simply
job
requires
express
judgment
officer
performance
majority
says
first
amendment
gives
ceballos
protection
even
judgment
case
sound
appropriately
expressed
indeed
idea
categorically
separating
citizen
interest
employee
interest
ignores
fact
ranks
public
service
include
share
poet
object
unite
avocation
vocation
citizen
servants
ones
whose
civic
interest
rises
highest
speak
pursuant
duties
exactly
ones
government
employers
want
question
public
employees
speaking
matters
obliged
address
generally
place
high
value
right
speak
responsible
citizen
reason
raise
counterintuitive
question
whether
public
interest
hearing
informed
employees
evaporates
speak
required
subject
core
jobs
two
terms
ago
recalled
public
value
pickering
perceived
speech
public
employees
class
underlying
decision
pickering
recognition
public
employees
often
members
community
likely
informed
opinions
operations
public
employers
operations
substantial
concern
public
able
speak
matters
community
deprived
informed
opinions
important
public
issues
interest
stake
much
public
interest
receiving
informed
opinion
employee
right
disseminate
san
diego
roe
per
curiam
citation
omitted
whit
less
true
employee
job
duties
require
speak
things
example
public
auditor
speaks
discovery
embezzlement
public
funds
building
inspector
makes
obligatory
report
attempt
bribe
law
enforcement
officer
expressly
balks
superior
order
violate
constitutional
rights
sworn
protect
majority
however
places
speakers
beyond
reach
first
amendment
protection
retaliation
nothing
accountable
individual
public
side
pickering
balance
changes
employee
speaks
pursuant
public
duties
side
government
employer
however
something
different
extent
agree
majority
majority
rightly
concerned
employee
speaks
matters
subject
comment
work
greater
leverage
create
office
uproars
fracture
government
authority
set
policy
carried
coherently
ranks
official
communications
official
consequences
creating
need
substantive
consistency
clarity
supervisors
must
ensure
employees
official
communications
accurate
demonstrate
sound
judgment
promote
employer
mission
ante
point
majority
makes
good
points
government
needs
civility
workplace
consistency
policy
honesty
competence
public
service
majority
concerns
share
require
categorical
exclusion
first
amendment
protection
official
retaliation
things
said
job
possible
respect
unchallenged
individual
public
interests
speech
pickering
balance
without
drawing
strange
line
mentioned
supra
sure
matter
judgment
judgment
account
undoubted
value
speech
whose
specific
public
job
responsibilities
bring
face
face
wrongdoing
incompetence
government
refuse
avert
eyes
shut
mouths
account
need
actually
disrupt
government
officials
corrupt
dangerously
incompetent
see
supra
thus
adequate
justification
suppression
potentially
valuable
information
simply
recognize
government
huge
interest
managing
employees
preventing
occasionally
irresponsible
one
turning
job
bully
pulpit
even
lesson
pickering
object
constitutional
adjudication
still
point
constitutionally
significant
interests
clash
resist
demand
try
make
adjustments
serve
values
stake
two
reasons
particular
make
think
adjustment
using
basic
pickering
balancing
scheme
perfectly
feasible
first
extent
government
legitimate
authority
subjects
speech
required
public
job
recognized
advance
setting
effect
minimum
heft
comments
claim
outweigh
thus
risks
government
great
enough
us
hold
outset
employee
commenting
subjects
course
duties
prevail
balance
unless
speaks
matter
unusual
importance
satisfies
high
standards
responsibility
way
examples
already
given
indicate
eligible
subject
matter
fair
say
comment
official
dishonesty
deliberately
unconstitutional
action
serious
wrongdoing
threats
health
safety
weigh
employee
favor
promulgation
standard
fail
discourage
meritless
actions
premised
bivens
six
unknown
fed
narcotics
agents
get
filed
standard
sift
second
reason
adapting
pickering
circumstances
hand
experience
circuits
recognized
claims
like
ceballos
first
amendment
protection
less
circumscribed
recognize
available
ninth
circuit
years
neither
circuits
accept
claims
like
one
debilitating
flood
litigation
indeed
represented
ceballos
lawyer
oral
argument
year
last
five
years
approximately
cases
different
courts
appeals
approximately
various
district
courts
tr
oral
arg
even
figures
reflect
readiness
litigate
might
well
cooled
view
importance
required
pickering
treatment
order
matter
majority
position
comes
guarantee
factbound
litigation
whether
public
employee
statements
made
pursuant
official
duties
ante
fact
majority
invites
litigation
describing
enquiry
practical
one
ante
apparently
based
totality
employment
see
supra
prosecutors
discretionary
statements
cases
addressed
press
courthouse
steps
made
pursuant
official
duties
government
nuclear
scientists
complaints
supervisors
colleague
improper
handling
radioactive
materials
made
pursuant
duties
ii
majority
seeks
support
two
lines
argument
extraneous
pickering
doctrine
one
turns
fallacious
reading
cases
government
speech
mistaken
assessment
protection
available
statutes
majority
accepts
fallacy
propounded
county
petitioners
federal
government
amicus
statement
made
within
scope
public
employment
treated
government
speech
see
ante
thus
differentiated
matter
law
personal
statements
first
amendment
protects
see
broadrick
oklahoma
majority
invokes
interpretation
set
rosenberger
rector
visitors
univ
rust
sullivan
held
infringement
speech
rights
title
funds
recipients
staffs
government
forbade
counseling
favor
abortion
method
family
planning
read
rust
mean
government
appropriates
public
funds
promote
particular
policy
entitled
say
wishes
rosenberger
supra
key
understanding
difference
case
rust
lies
terms
respective
employees
jobs
particular
extent
terms
require
espousal
substantive
position
prescribed
government
advance
public
employees
hired
promote
particular
policy
broadcasting
particular
message
set
government
everyone
working
government
hired
speak
government
manifesto
see
legal
services
corporation
velazquez
claim
indication
ceballos
hired
perform
speaking
assignment
paid
enforce
law
constitutional
action
exercise
county
government
prosecutorial
power
acting
honestly
competently
constitutionally
sense
position
apparently
required
hew
substantive
message
relatively
abstract
point
favoring
respect
law
evenhanded
enforcement
subjects
level
controversy
case
rust
unlike
doctors
rust
ceballos
paid
advance
one
specific
policy
among
legitimately
available
defined
specific
message
limited
particular
message
forbidden
county
government
interest
speech
therefore
equated
terms
specific
prescribed
forbidden
substantive
position
comparable
federal
government
interest
rust
rust
authority
notion
government
may
exercise
plenary
control
every
comment
made
public
employee
job
course
district
attorney
lacked
interest
high
order
ceballos
might
say
speech
undercut
effective
lawful
prosecution
every
reason
rein
fire
statement
created
needless
tension
among
law
enforcement
agencies
fair
subject
concern
true
inaccurate
statements
false
ones
made
course
work
interests
government
part
entirely
distinct
claim
ceballos
speech
government
speech
preset
proscribed
content
exemplified
rust
county
petitioners
even
make
claim
answer
ceballos
complaint
see
infra
fallacy
majority
reliance
rosenberger
understanding
rust
doctrine
moreover
portends
bloated
notion
controllable
government
speech
going
well
beyond
circumstances
case
consider
breadth
new
formulation
restricting
speech
owes
existence
public
employee
professional
responsibilities
infringe
liberties
employee
might
enjoyed
private
citizen
simply
reflects
exercise
employer
control
employer
commissioned
created
ante
ostensible
domain
beyond
pale
first
amendment
spacious
enough
include
even
teaching
public
university
professor
hope
today
majority
mean
imperil
first
amendment
protection
academic
freedom
public
colleges
universities
whose
teachers
necessarily
speak
write
pursuant
official
duties
see
grutter
bollinger
long
recognized
given
important
purpose
public
education
expansive
freedoms
speech
thought
associated
university
environment
universities
occupy
special
niche
constitutional
tradition
keyishian
board
regents
univ
state
nation
deeply
committed
safeguarding
academic
freedom
transcendent
value
us
merely
teachers
concerned
freedom
therefore
special
concern
first
amendment
tolerate
laws
cast
pall
orthodoxy
classroom
vigilant
protection
constitutional
freedoms
nowhere
vital
community
american
quoting
shelton
tucker
sweezy
new
hampshire
governmental
enquiry
contents
scholar
lectures
state
university
unquestionably
invasion
liberties
areas
academic
freedom
political
expression
areas
government
extremely
reticent
tread
majority
second
argument
disputed
limitation
pickering
doctrine
first
amendment
little
work
owing
assertedly
comprehensive
complement
state
national
statutes
protecting
government
vindictive
bosses
see
ante
even
close
eyes
tenet
applicability
provision
constitution
never
depended
vagaries
state
federal
law
board
wabaunsee
cty
umbehr
majority
counsel
rest
easy
fails
begin
speech
addressing
official
wrongdoing
may
well
fall
outside
protected
defined
classic
sense
exposing
official
fault
third
party
public
teacher
givhan
example
raised
issue
unconstitutional
hiring
bias
qualified
sort
fired
private
conversation
school
principal
event
combined
variants
statutory
definitions
protections
add
patchwork
showing
worries
may
remitted
legislatures
relief
see
westman
modesitt
whistleblowing
law
retaliatory
discharge
ed
state
statutes
protect
government
workers
including
employees
municipalities
subdivisions
others
stop
state
limit
protection
employees
tell
bosses
speak
others
forbid
bosses
imposing
requirement
federal
whistleblower
protection
act
et
current
case
law
requires
employee
complaining
retaliation
show
proof
person
criticized
acting
good
faith
compliance
law
see
lachance
white
ca
fed
cert
denied
federal
employees
held
protection
disclosures
made
immediate
supervisors
see
willis
department
agriculture
ca
fed
horton
department
navy
ca
fed
cert
denied
statements
facts
publicly
known
already
see
francisco
office
personnel
management
ca
fed
significantly
federal
employees
held
unprotected
statements
made
connection
normal
employment
duties
huffman
office
personnel
management
ca
fed
speech
majority
says
covered
powerful
network
legislative
enactments
available
seek
expose
wrongdoing
ante
point
disparage
particular
statutes
speak
merits
interpretations
federal
courts
merely
show
current
understanding
statutory
protection
individuals
sorts
governmental
jobs
saying
sorts
things
addressed
civic
concerns
get
different
protection
depending
local
state
federal
jurisdictions
happened
employ
iii
remands
appeals
considered
disposition
memorandum
ceballos
charges
retaliation
speech
apparently
outside
ambit
utterances
pursuant
official
duties
appeals
takes
case
consider
following
facts
escape
emphasis
majority
opinion
owing
ceballos
says
sought
position
personal
commitment
perform
civic
work
showing
superior
petitioner
frank
sunstedt
disposition
memorandum
issue
case
ceballos
complied
sunstedt
direction
tone
accusatory
rhetoric
concern
memorandum
unnecessarily
incendiary
shown
sheriff
department
meeting
members
department
ceballos
told
immediate
supervisor
petitioner
carol
najera
thought
brady
maryland
obliged
give
defense
internal
memorandum
exculpatory
evidence
says
najera
responded
ordering
write
new
memorandum
containing
nothing
deputy
sheriff
statements
balked
instead
proposed
turn
existing
memorandum
conclusions
redacted
work
product
issue
revealing
conclusions
arose
preparing
suppression
hearing
ceballos
maintains
sunstedt
ordered
najera
representing
prosecution
give
trial
judge
full
picture
circumstances
najera
told
ceballos
suffer
retaliation
testified
affidavit
contained
intentional
fabrications
event
ceballos
testimony
generally
stopped
short
conclusions
hearing
trial
judge
denied
motion
suppress
explaining
found
grounds
independent
challenged
material
sufficient
show
probable
cause
warrant
ceballos
says
next
six
months
supervisors
retaliated
written
reports
see
ante
also
spoken
statements
hearing
testimony
pending
criminal
case
internal
grievance
filed
ceballos
challenging
actions
pending
ceballos
spoke
meeting
bar
association
misconduct
sheriff
department
criminal
case
lack
policy
district
attorney
office
handling
allegations
police
misconduct
retaliatory
acts
ascribed
supervisors
two
days
later
office
dismissed
ceballos
grievance
result
attributes
part
bar
association
speech
ceballos
action
petitioners
claims
individuals
retaliated
exercising
first
amendment
rights
submitting
memorandum
discussing
matter
najera
sunstedt
testifying
truthfully
hearing
speaking
bar
mentioned
appeals
saw
need
address
protection
afforded
ceballos
statements
disposition
memorandum
thought
protected
pickering
test
upon
remand
open
appeals
consider
application
pickering
retaliation
shown
statements
statements
made
pursuant
official
duties
obvious
sense
claim
relating
truthful
testimony
must
surely
analyzed
independently
protect
integrity
judicial
process
gil
garcetti
et
petitioners
richard
ceballos
writ
certiorari
appeals
ninth
circuit
may
justice
breyer
dissenting
case
asks
whether
first
amendment
protects
public
employees
engage
speech
involves
matters
public
concern
takes
place
ordinary
course
performing
duties
government
job
write
separately
explain
fully
accept
either
justice
souter
answer
question
presented
begin
believe
common
ground
virtually
human
interaction
takes
place
speech
first
amendment
offer
speech
degree
protection
rather
judges
must
apply
different
protective
presumptions
different
contexts
scrutinizing
government
restrictions
differently
depending
upon
general
category
activity
compare
burson
freeman
plurality
opinion
political
speech
central
hudson
gas
elec
public
serv
commercial
speech
rust
sullivan
government
speech
speech
government
employees
issue
first
amendment
offers
protection
offer
protection
unduly
interfere
legitimate
governmental
interests
interest
efficient
administration
government
like
employer
must
adequate
authority
direct
activities
employees
also
efficient
administration
legislatively
authorized
programs
reflects
constitutional
need
effectively
implement
public
democratically
determined
consequently
government
employee
speaks
employee
upon
matters
personal
interest
first
amendment
offer
protection
connick
myers
employee
speaks
citizen
upon
matters
public
concern
first
amendment
offers
protection
speech
survives
screening
test
pickering
board
ed
township
high
school
dist
test
called
legal
shorthand
pickering
balancing
requires
judge
balance
interests
employee
commenting
upon
matters
public
concern
interest
state
employer
promoting
efficiency
public
services
performs
employees
ibid
see
also
connick
supra
prior
cases
decide
screening
test
judge
apply
circumstances
us
namely
government
employee
speaks
upon
matter
public
concern
course
ordinary
duties
government
employee
ii
majority
answers
question
holding
public
employees
make
statements
pursuant
official
duties
employees
speaking
citizens
first
amendment
purposes
constitution
insulate
communications
employer
discipline
ante
word
majority
says
never
word
view
absolute
like
majority
understand
need
affor
government
employers
sufficient
discretion
manage
operations
ante
agree
constitution
seek
displac
managerial
discretion
judicial
supervision
ibid
nonetheless
may
well
circumstances
special
demand
constitutional
protection
speech
issue
governmental
justifications
may
limited
administrable
standards
seem
readily
available
point
majority
fears
department
management
lawsuit
misplaced
instance
believe
courts
apply
pickering
standard
even
though
government
employee
speaks
upon
matters
public
concern
course
ordinary
duties
case
respondent
government
lawyer
complained
retaliation
part
basis
speech
contained
disposition
memorandum
says
fell
within
scope
obligations
brady
maryland
facts
present
two
special
circumstances
together
justify
first
amendment
review
first
speech
issue
professional
speech
speech
lawyer
speech
subject
independent
regulation
canons
profession
canons
provide
obligation
speak
certain
instances
government
interest
forbidding
speech
diminished
cf
legal
services
corporation
velazquez
restricting
lsc
legal
services
corporation
attorneys
advising
clients
presenting
arguments
analyses
courts
distorts
legal
system
altering
traditional
role
attorneys
see
also
polk
county
dodson
public
defender
amenable
administrative
direction
sense
employees
state
see
generally
post
subsidized
speech
yale
rofessionals
must
always
qualify
loyalty
commitment
vertical
hierarchy
organization
horizontal
commitment
general
professional
norms
standards
objective
specificity
public
availability
profession
canons
also
help
diminish
risk
courts
improperly
interfere
government
necessary
authority
manage
work
second
constitution
imposes
speech
obligations
upon
government
professional
employee
prosecutor
constitutional
obligation
learn
preserve
communicate
defense
exculpatory
impeachment
evidence
government
possession
kyles
whitley
brady
supra
example
might
prison
doctor
similar
constitutionally
related
professional
obligation
communicate
superiors
seriously
unsafe
unsanitary
conditions
cellblock
cf
farmer
brennan
may
well
examples
professional
special
constitutional
obligations
present
need
protect
employee
speech
augmented
need
broad
government
authority
control
speech
likely
diminished
administrable
standards
quite
likely
available
hence
find
constitution
mandates
special
protection
employee
speech
circumstances
thus
apply
pickering
balancing
test
iii
agree
much
justice
souter
analysis
believe
constitutional
standard
enunciates
fails
give
sufficient
weight
serious
managerial
administrative
concerns
majority
describes
standard
instruct
courts
apply
pickering
balancing
cases
says
government
prevail
unless
employee
speaks
matter
unusual
importance
satisfies
high
standards
responsibility
way
ante
dissenting
opinion
justice
souter
adds
comment
official
dishonesty
deliberately
unconstitutional
action
serious
wrongdoing
threats
health
safety
weigh
employee
favor
however
far
many
issues
public
concern
even
defined
matters
unusual
importance
screen
screen
much
government
administration
typically
involves
matters
public
concern
else
government
involved
public
issues
indeed
matters
unusual
importance
often
daily
concerns
police
intelligence
agencies
military
many
whose
jobs
involve
protecting
public
health
safety
environment
aspect
justice
souter
adjustment
basic
pickering
balancing
scheme
similar
present
insistence
speech
legitimate
news
interest
employee
speaks
private
citizen
see
san
diego
roe
per
curiam
gives
extra
weight
government
augmented
need
direct
speech
ordinary
part
employee
duties
moreover
speech
vast
numbers
public
employees
deals
wrongdoing
health
safety
honesty
example
police
officers
firefighters
environmental
protection
agents
building
inspectors
hospital
workers
bank
regulators
indeed
categorization
encompass
speech
employee
performing
almost
public
function
except
perhaps
setting
electricity
rates
categories
bear
obvious
relation
constitutional
importance
protecting
speech
issue
underlying
problem
breadth
coverage
standard
despite
predictions
government
likely
prevail
balance
unless
speech
concerns
official
dishonesty
deliberately
unconstitutional
action
serious
wrongdoing
threats
health
safety
ante
avoid
judicial
need
undertake
balance
first
place
form
judicial
activity
ability
dissatisfied
employee
file
complaint
engage
discovery
insist
undertake
balancing
interests
may
interfere
unreasonably
managerial
function
ability
employer
control
way
employee
performs
basic
job
use
mechanisms
arbitration
civil
service
review
boards
remedies
employees
employers
may
bargained
legislatures
may
enacted
time
list
categories
substantially
overlaps
areas
law
already
provides
nonconstitutional
protection
statutes
like
see
ante
majority
opinion
ante
souter
dissenting
overlap
diminishes
need
constitutional
forum
also
means
adoption
test
authorize
federal
legal
actions
threaten
upset
legislatively
struck
administratively
struck
balance
statutes
administrative
procedures
embody
iv
conclude
first
amendment
sometimes
authorize
judicial
actions
based
upon
government
employee
speech
involves
matter
public
concern
also
takes
place
course
ordinary
duties
presence
augmented
need
constitutional
protection
diminished
risk
undue
judicial
interference
governmental
management
public
affairs
view
conditions
met
case
pickering
balancing
consequently
appropriate
respect
dissent
footnotes
see
branton
dallas
police
internal
investigator
demoted
police
chief
bringing
false
testimony
fellow
officer
attention
city
official
miller
jones
police
officer
demoted
opposing
police
chief
attempt
us
official
position
coerce
financially
independent
organization
potentially
ruinous
merger
delgado
jones
police
officer
sanctioned
reporting
criminal
activity
implicated
local
political
figure
good
friend
police
chief
herts
smith
school
district
official
contract
renewed
gave
frank
testimony
district
desegregation
efforts
kincade
blue
springs
engineer
fired
reporting
supervisors
contractors
failing
complete
projects
resulting
dam
might
structurally
unstable
fox
district
columbia
cadc
lottery
board
security
officer
fired
informing
police
theft
made
possible
rather
drastic
managerial
ineptitude
footnotes
seems
stranger
still
light
majority
concession
first
amendment
protection
public
employee
repeats
statements
made
pursuant
duties
separate
public
forum
letter
newspaper
ante
say
value
speech
pursuant
duties
always
greater
pessimistic
enough
expect
one
response
holding
moves
government
employers
expand
stated
job
descriptions
include
official
duties
exclude
even
currently
protectable
speech
first
amendment
purview
government
freely
penalize
school
personnel
officer
criticizing
principal
speech
subject
falls
within
personnel
officer
job
responsibilities
government
may
well
try
limit
english
teacher
options
simple
expedient
defining
teachers
job
responsibilities
expansively
investing
general
obligation
ensure
sound
administration
school
hence
today
rule
presents
regrettable
prospect
protection
pickering
board
ed
township
high
school
dist
may
diminished
expansive
statements
employment
duties
majority
response
enquiry
determine
duties
practical
one
ante
alleviate
concern
sets
standard
discourage
government
employers
setting
duties
expansively
engender
litigation
decide
stated
duties
actual
merely
formal
frost
two
tramps
mud
time
collected
poems
prose
plays
poirier
richardson
eds
put
fine
point
human
resources
division
los
angeles
county
district
attorney
office
ceballos
employer
telling
anyone
listen
work
provides
personal
satisfaction
fulfillment
comes
knowing
contributing
essential
services
citizens
los
angeles
county
career
opportunities
http
internet
materials
visited
may
available
clerk
case
file
expresses
interest
identifying
individual
ideals
citizen
employees
obligations
government
see
brief
amicus
curiae
stating
public
employees
motivated
perform
duties
serve
public
right
example
food
drug
administration
appealing
physicians
scientists
statisticians
work
center
drug
evaluation
research
message
give
back
community
state
country
making
difference
lives
americans
everywhere
career
opportunities
cder
make
difference
http
indeed
congress
concurrent
resolution
previously
expressly
endorsed
respect
citizen
obligations
prime
responsibility
government
employees
person
government
service
ut
loyalty
highest
moral
principles
country
loyalty
persons
party
government
department
shall
xpose
corruption
wherever
discovered
code
ethics
government
service
con
res
stat
display
code
government
buildings
required
law
stat
obligation
repealed
office
government
ethics
authorization
act
pub
stat
also
said
public
employer
entitled
obliged
impose
high
standards
honesty
accuracy
judgment
employees
speak
work
criteria
however
likely
discourage
meritless
litigation
provide
handle
summary
judgment
employee
spoken
example
unlikely
blame
prior
bad
judgment
sues
retaliation
according
majority
logic
litigation
encourages
unfortunate
result
demand
ing
permanent
judicial
intervention
conduct
governmental
operations
ante
even
though
recognized
authorize
suit
every
alleged
violation
federal
law
livadas
bradshaw
rule
remains
generally
presumptively
available
remedy
claimed
violations
federal
law
individual
enforcement
rendered
unavailable
alleged
violations
federal
law
underlying
statutory
provision
part
federal
statutory
scheme
clearly
incompatible
individual
enforcement
see
rancho
palos
verdes
abrams
del
code
tit
stat
haw
rev
stat
rev
stat
ann
west
mass
laws
ch
west
rev
stat
rev
stat
ann
supp
ohio
rev
code
ann
lexis
code
ann
cum
code
et
seq
rev
stat
et
seq
iowa
code
ann
et
seq
stat
ann
cum
supp
mo
rev
stat
cum
supp
stat
ann
lexis
okla
tit
et
seq
west
supp
rev
code
wyo
stat
ann
idaho
code
lexis
rev
stat
tit
mass
laws
ch
west
rev
stat
ann
ii
stat
ann
west
civ
serv
law
ann
west
wyo
stat
ann
stat
ann
cum
supp
rev
stat
ann
west
mo
rev
stat
cum
supp
okla
tit
west
supp
rev
stat
see
supra
case
comes
motions
petitioners
summary
judgment
evidence
ceballos
believed
justifiable
inferences
drawn
favor
anderson
liberty
lobby
sunstedt
demoted
ceballos
trial
deputy
murder
case
reassigned
junior
colleague
experience
homicide
matters
new
murder
cases
assigned
attorney
gil
garcetti
relying
part
sunstedt
recommendation
denied
ceballos
promotion
finally
sunstedt
najera
transferred
office
el
monte
branch
requiring
longer
commuting
transferring
ceballos
najera
offered
choice
transferring
remaining
pomona
branch
prosecuting
misdemeanors
instead
felonies
ceballos
refused
choose
najera
transferred
county
petitioners
position
claims
difficult
follow
least
puzzling
motion
summary
judgment
denied
actions
responsive
ceballos
criticism
sheriff
affidavit
app
maintaining
ceballos
transferred
el
monte
branch
decreased
workload
pomona
branch
next
rotation
go
serve
filing
deputy
contending
ceballos
murder
case
reassigned
junior
colleague
give
attorney
murder
trial
experience
transferred
juvenile
division
district
attorney
office
arguing
ceballos
denied
promotion
garcetti
despite
sunstedt
stellar
review
ceballos
garcetti
unaware
matter
people
cuskey
criminal
case
ceballos
wrote
pertinent
disposition
memorandum
reply
ceballos
opposition
summary
judgment
however
shows
petitioners
argued
pickering
assessment
want
holding
ceballos
categorically
disentitled
first
amendment
protection
giving
great
weight
favor
workplace
disharmony
distrust
caused
ceballos
actions
app