Dixon v. University of Toledo
Petition for certiorari denied on October 7, 2013
Issue: (1) Whether the policymaker exception analysis from Elrod v. Burns and Branti v. Finkel should apply to employee speech cases that do not involve political patronage; and (2) whether a presumption in favor of protecting the free speech interests of a government employee should apply in a case not involving political patronage and where the employee is speaking as a private citizen on a matter of public concern and the speech does not directly criticize her employer or any identified policy of her employer.
SCOTUSblog Coverage
- Petition of the day (Mary Pat Dwyer, September 28, 2013)
Date | Proceedings and Orders |
---|---|
05/28/2013 | Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due July 1, 2013) |
06/04/2013 | Order extending time to file response to petition to and including August 15, 2013. |
06/19/2013 | Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the petitioner. |
06/19/2013 | Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the respondents. |
06/27/2013 | Brief amici curiae of Alliance Defending Freedom, and Pacific Justice Institute filed. |
08/02/2013 | Brief of respondents University of Toledo, et al. in opposition filed. |
08/20/2013 | Reply of petitioner Crystal Dixon filed. |
08/21/2013 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of September 30, 2013. |
10/07/2013 | Petition DENIED. |