Maples v. Martin

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that transfer of university professors between departments without loss of rank or pay did not implicate a liberty interest of the professors
• illustrating that protected speech includes speech that addresses funding issues, admission policies, and accreditation standards (collecting cases)
• illustrating that speech criticizing salaries, tenure decisions, a proposed course syllabus, and course assignments is unprotected (collecting cases)
• finding that Pickering balance weighed in favor of government where plaintiff’s speech “subject[ed] internal administrative policies to public scrutiny . . . [and thereby] distracted both students and faculty from the primary academic tasks of education and research”
• collecting cases and outlining that protected speech includes speech that addresses funding issues, admission policies, and accreditation standards
• collecting cases and outlining that speech criticizing salaries, tenure decisions, a proposed course syllable, and course assignments is unprotected

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).