Lauren Marie Hopfenspirger v. the State of Texas

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that, consistent with guarantees of Fourteenth Amendment, State may not compel police officers to answer work-related questions or lose their employment
• holding that, consistent with guarantees of Fourteenth Amendment, State may not compel police officers to answer work-related questions or lose their employment
• concluding that public employment may not be hinged on the relinquishment of the right of the individual to invoke their Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination
• concluding that public employment may not be hinged on the relinquishment of the right of the individual to invoke their Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination
• holding that forcing police officers to forfeit their employment or answer incriminating questions made the officers' answers involuntary
• holding that statements were compelled where defendants were expressly informed that a refusal to answer questions about possible criminal conduct would result in loss of their jobs

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).