Marvin Pickering Case Summary
Marvin Pickering was a high school science teacher from Will County, Illinois who was fired by the Board of Education for writing a letter to the editor. The letter was published in a local newspaper and contained many negative and inflammatory statements toward the school board regarding their use of taxpayer’s money. Specifically, Pickering was upset about the use of bond money to athletic programs, instead of fixing facilities and paying teachers. The Board of Education concluded that Pickering’s letter was “detrimental to the efficient operation and administration of the schools of the district” (Essex, 2012). Pickering argued that being fired for writing a letter as a private citizen violated both his First and Fourteenth Amendment rights to Free Speech and Due Process under the U.S. Constitution.
The Decision After the Board of Education fired Marvin Pickering, he appealed to the circuit court in Will County, Illinois and they rejected his appeal and ruled in favor on the Board of Education. Pickering appealed again to the State Supreme Court of Illinois and they too held for the Board of …show more content…
However, this protection is not without limits. There is still a professional duty to protect confidentiality and not cause disruption to the operation of a school. Basically, teachers do not have carte blanche freedom of speech if it can be proven to be or create a substantial disturbance within the school community. Because Pickering was able to show the court that he thought his statements were true, I believe there seemed to be a lack of malice on his part. The Board of Education asserted at every level of the court system that his statements were unjustified, and damaged the reputations of its members (Essex, 2012). I agree with the decision and think the case lacked the evidence that his words even if untrue or unfounded really affected students and school as a
The Decision After the Board of Education fired Marvin Pickering, he appealed to the circuit court in Will County, Illinois and they rejected his appeal and ruled in favor on the Board of Education. Pickering appealed again to the State Supreme Court of Illinois and they too held for the Board of …show more content…
However, this protection is not without limits. There is still a professional duty to protect confidentiality and not cause disruption to the operation of a school. Basically, teachers do not have carte blanche freedom of speech if it can be proven to be or create a substantial disturbance within the school community. Because Pickering was able to show the court that he thought his statements were true, I believe there seemed to be a lack of malice on his part. The Board of Education asserted at every level of the court system that his statements were unjustified, and damaged the reputations of its members (Essex, 2012). I agree with the decision and think the case lacked the evidence that his words even if untrue or unfounded really affected students and school as a