Daniel M. Berry v. Department of Social Services, Tehama County Bill Snelson, Director

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the government’s “need to avoid possible violations of the Establishment Clause” justified a restriction on employee speech
• holding that the government’s “need to avoid possible violations of the Establishment Clause” justified a restriction on employee speech
• holding that a state may prohibit an employee from posting religious signs in his workspace when clients routinely entered that workspace for purposes of consulting with an agent of the state
• holding the Pickering balancing test applies to constitutional challenges to restrictions on public employees’ religious speech
• applying Pickering balance test where government employer prohibited employee from expressing his religious views by displaying religious items in his cubicle
• “Permitting appellants to evangelize while providing services to clients would jeopardize the state’s ability to pro- vide services in a religion-neutral matter.” (internal citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).