Rankin v. McPherson | |
---|---|
Argued March 23, 1987 Decided June 24, 1987 | |
Full case name | Walter Rankin, et al. v. Ardith McPherson |
Citations | 483 U.S. 378 (more) |
Case history | |
Prior | Summary judgment for respondent granted, Civ. Action No. H-81-1442 (S.D. Tex. 1983); vacated and remanded, 736 F.2d 175 (5th Cir. 1984); judgement confirmed from the bench; reversed, 786 F.2d 1233 (5th Cir. 1986); cert. granted, 479 U.S. 913 (1986). |
Holding | |
Rankin's interest in discharging McPherson was outweighed by her rights under the First Amendment. The Court held that McPherson's statement, when considered in context, "plainly dealt with a matter of public concern." | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinions | |
Majority | Marshall, joined by Brennan, Blackmun, Powell, Stevens |
Concurrence | Powell |
Dissent | Scalia, joined by Rehnquist, White, O'Connor |
Laws applied | |
U.S. Const. amend. I |
Rankin v. McPherson, 483 U.S. 378 (1987), is a major decision of the Supreme Court of the United States concerning the First Amendment, specifically whether the protection of the First Amendment extends to government employees who make extremely critical remarks about the President. The Court ruled that, while direct threats on the President's life would not be protected speech, a comment — even an unpopular or seemingly extreme one — made on a matter of public interest and spoken by a government employee with no policymaking function and a job with little public interaction, would be protected.[1]
© MMXXIII Rich X Search. We shall prevail. All rights reserved. Rich X Search