Jay Embry v. City of Calumet City

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that the court must consider “the powers inherent in the office... even if the employee never actually exercises those powers”
• “Connick-Picker-ing does not apply [where policymaker] identifies no statement of public concern unconnected to political affiliation or policy views that led to his dismissal.”
• “Connick–Pickering does not apply [where policymaker] iden‐ tifies no statement of public concern unconnected to political affiliation or policy views that led to his dismissal.”
• stating that “[discretion is also important”
• “We examine the powers inherent in the office .., even if the employee never actually exercises those powers.”
• “We examine the powers inherent in the office … even if the employee never actually exercises those powers.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).