After
playing in the NFL for eight years, Gerald Sensabaugh worked as a high school coach for
David Crockett High School. His first year went well. In his second season, he
toured elementary schools and said he was “shocked at the poor condition of the
school.”
When
Sensabaugh posted about it on Facebook, his boss, district director Kimber
Halliburton, texted him saying he didn’t have all the facts and asked him to
take it down, citing photos of schoolchildren he’d included.
Two days
later, Sensabaugh posted about how he thought it was wrong for the district to
use unpaid prison labor on campus while kids were attending school.
Again
Halliburton and others texted Sensabaugh and tried to both threaten and cajole
him into not making future posts, Sensabaugh said.
Sensabaugh
was fired—but he’s not going quietly. He is asking the Supreme Court to revisit
its “qualified immunity” standard for public officials.
That doctrine
was created by the Supreme Court in the 1967 case Pierson v. Ray. It says that
when a public official violates someone’s constitutional rights— here, Sensabaugh is claiming he was fired for First Amendment speech— the official
isn’t personally liable unless he or she clearly knew that they were violating
a right.
Legal
scholars believe it gives too many public officials a free pass for really bad
behavior—for example, misconduct cases involving police who engage in theft and
violence in their official capacity.
Sensabaugh’s
attorney makes the argument that “qualified immunity entitlement continues to
grow unbridled and acts as a steel barrier protecting virtually every public
official sued in their individual capacity.” If Sensabaugh wins, public
officials will hopefully be deterred from depriving citizens of their rights.
No comments:
Post a Comment