City of San Diego v. Roe

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that NTEU was inapplicable because the plaintiff in Roe deliberately linked his speech to his public employment as a police officer
• stating that a topic is a matter of public concern if it is of \general interest\ or of \legitimate news interest\
• holding that the sexually explicit acts of the government employee, depicted in a video, did not address a matter of public concern where the acts “did nothing to inform the public about any aspect of the [employing agency’s] functioning or operation”
• explaining that “a public employee’s speech must touch on a matter of ‘public concern’ ” in order to “merit Pickering balancing”
• holding that a police officer’s off-duty distribution of videos of him engaging in pornographic activity was not a matter of public concern in part because “[tjhe speech in question was detrimental to the mission and functions of the employer”
• stating that the employee’s interest in free expression should receive greater weight in cases involving “informed opinions on important public issues”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).