A school administrator sued her former employer school district alleging that her First Amendment right to free speech was violated when she was placed on administrative leave and not rehired, allegedly in response to a Facebook post promoting a gun raffle fundraiser for her political campaign. The court found that her speech was political in nature and raised genuine questions about whether the district’s actions were motivated by disagreement with that speech.
The administrator posted an ad for a gun rally, which she promoted on Facebook in May 2022 as part of her campaign for Regional Superintendent of Schools. Shortly after, the school district placed her on leave and chose not to renew her contract, citing poor performance and concerns about the post’s timing following the Uvalde school shooting. The administrator sued, claiming that her First Amendment rights were violated and that her 2021 and 2022 employment contracts were breached, citing the school’s reasons as a pretext and alleging that the district retaliated against her for engaging in protected political speech.
The court agreed that campaign-related speech is a matter of public concern and noted that there was insufficient evidence that the post caused disruption or undermined her ability to perform her job. Unlike in Inendino v. Nance-Holt, where a firefighter’s offensive comments directly harmed public trust and justified termination, the administrators post did not include threats or inflammatory language, nor was it clearly linked to her official duties. Because material facts remained in dispute—particularly whether performance concerns were genuine or retaliatory—the court denied summary judgment on the First Amendment claim, allowing it to proceed to trial. However, it dismissed her contract claims, finding no valid 2022 contract and no breach of her 2021 contract since she was paid in full.
This case highlights that while public employers may discipline employees for speech that disrupts operations or damages trust, political speech by public employees outside of work remains strongly protected under the First Amendment.
