Monday, October 28, 2013

The Mayor and the First Amendment Lawsuit


Many residents of Bay Village may not know that the second highest court in the country (the U.S. Court of Appeals, which sits under the Supreme Court) held that Mayor Sutherland may well have violated the First Amendment in suspending a fire fighter who publicly criticized her in a council meeting.  Here are two online summaries of the case -- summary 1 and summary 2 -- and the actual opinion is posted in its entirety here

In this case, decided in 2011, the U.S. Court of Appeals held unanimously that the fire fighter’s claim against Mayor Sutherland deserved to go to trial.  Specifically, the firefighter made a strong legal case that his fundamental right to free speech was violated when she suspended him after he raised criticisms about whether the public’s safety was being adequately protected by the City after the tragic drowning of a young boy off the Bay Village coast.  After the Court of Appeals sent the case back for a full trial on this First Amendment violation in 2011, Mayor Sutherland settled the case.  (It isn’t clear how much Sutherland paid to settle, nor whether the money came from tax coffers…..  This isn’t to suggest this litigation was supported by residents’ dollars – the information just isn’t available to illuminate these questions).

Our nation’s Bill of Rights makes it clear that government officials cannot penalize employees who, in their capacity as citizens, raise questions or voice criticisms against the government.  If this kind of retaliation were allowed, then those who work for the government as civil servants would be turning over their right to speak freely as citizens; exactly the kind of tyranny that our founding fathers and revolutionary heroes worked so hard to fight against.   What is even worse, if mayors and other government officials can threaten employees with the loss of their jobs every time they raise questions about their leadership in their capacity as citizens, then government officials could bully employees into silence and control the information that reaches the public.

I suspect that few Mayors in the country have this kind of negative line on their political resumes – a unanimous opinion from the U.S. Court of Appeals holding they may have violated the U.S. Constitution in their treatment of City employees.  At the very least, Bay Village residents should know about this important First Amendment case in deciding how to cast their votes next week. 

6 comments:

  1. Wow. Thanks for posting. I was not aware of this. Lydia

    ReplyDelete
  2. Bay Village residents will never know how much this lawsuit and many others have cost them as taxpayers. It looks like they settle with a special clause on just about each case and do the "I need to look into that and get back to you" dance when asked in public meetings for answers.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Lawsuits and insurance claims:
    What were the legal fees and who paid the fees to whom:
    1. Westmorland and First Amendment Rights
    2. Ohio Citizens Action Group-peddlers, solicitors and canvassers
    3. Hail & Super Storm Sandy's damage to buildings (2 separate occurrences)
    4. Collapse of the salt dome
    5. Fire at service garage
    6. Contract negotiations with five unions
    7. Workers compensation claims
    8. Ingelfield litigation

    ReplyDelete
  4. Police Department Construction Litigation-Cuyahoga County Court CV-05-566931 CITY OF BAY VILLAGE vs. BRANDSTETTER CARROLL ZOFCIN INC
    What was the initial settlement offer?
    What did the total cost the city by vendor?
    What was the final settlement?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Elected Law Director:
    What was the total cost to the city, by vendor to keep the initiative off the ballot?

    ReplyDelete
  6. City Council agenda for this coming Monday night has litigation for the new tennis court??.
    Ching, ching!

    ReplyDelete