Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 17 JANUARY 2013

Political Affiliation & Protected Speech Retaliation - Sixth Circuit Widens Circuit Split

Proskauer Rose LLP
Proskauer Rose LLP
Contributor
Proskauer Rose LLP

Proskauer Rose LLP

Firm Overview Proskauer is an elite global law firm with more than 900 lawyers across key financial...

View firm profile
Explore more from Proskauer Rose LLP

The Sixth Circuit recently held that Michigan state employees could base First Amendment political-affiliation and protected-speech retaliation claims on their perceived political affiliations, even absent actual affiliations with the party in question.

United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

The Sixth Circuit recently held that Michigan state employees could base First Amendment political-affiliation and protected-speech retaliation claims on their perceived political affiliations, even absent actual affiliations with the party in question.  Dye v. Office of the Racing Comm'n, No. 11-cv-1828 (6th Cir. Dec. 18, 2012).   It's important for government and private employers alike to appreciate the import of this decision, and it's noteworthy that this decision widens a split between the Sixth and Third Circuits.

Background

Four Racing Stewards working for Michigan's Office of the Racing Commissioner ("ORC") alleged that the ORC Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner retaliated against them based on their perceived political affiliations.  Specifically, they claimed that the Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner, who were political appointees of Michigan's Democratic Governor, did so because they perceived them as being affiliated with the Republican Party

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from