Pickering v.

Board of Education Court Case 1

Kendal Kerbrat

EDU 210

Dr. Dale Warby

6/8/18

Artifact 1- Pickering v. Board of Education Reading Court Cases

1. Citation- Pickering v. Board of Education, June 3, 1968, United States Supreme Court.

2. Facts- The Board of Education, the appellee, dismissed a teacher, the appellant, for

publishing and writing a letter for the newspaper that criticized the Board’s allocation of

school funds between educational and athletic programs. Also in the letter discussed the

Board’s and superintendent’s methods of informing or preventing the informing of the

school district taxpayers of the real reasons why additional tax revenues were being

sought out for the schools. The appellee, the board, claimed that many statements in the

letter were false and that the interest of the school required that the appellant be

dismissed. The appellant, the teacher, claimed that his letter and himself were protected

by the first and fourteenth amendment right. The lower court decision was to let the

teacher be dismissed.

3. Issues- Is the appellant protected by his first and fourteenth amendment when writing the

letter and publishing the letter that made claims about the school funds and taxes? Does

the appellee have the right to dismiss the appellant based off the incorrect information

published and written in the letter?

Pickering v. Board of Education Court Case 2

4. Decision- Yes, the appellant is protected by the first and fourteenth amendment when

writing and publishing the letter about the school funding and taxes. No, the school board

has the right to dismiss the appellant for writing and publishing the letter.

5. Reason- The court decided that the teacher’s interest as a citizen in making public

comment, the letter, must be balanced with the State’s interest in promoting the

efficiency of its employee’s public services. The statements made in the letter that was

written and published by the appellant, did not allow the Board’s action in dismissal to be

correct. The statements made did not show and was thought to have affected the teachers

ability to teach.