In Engquist v. Oregon Department of Agriculture, the Supreme Court held that public employees may not use the so-called equal protection clause of class-of-one doctrine to challenge the constitutionality of arguably arbitrary adverse personnel actions. In the 2000 case of Village of Willowbrook v. Olech, the high court had authorized citizens to bring class-of-one equal protection lawsuits to challenge arguably arbitrary discretionary decisions by government officials. The decision provides further evidence of the ongoing effort by a majority of the Roberts Court to limit the constitutional rights of public employees. The article argues that the ongoing deconstitutionalization of public personnel management has significant implications for the management of public organizations. If the trend continues, public employees, much like their private sector counterparts, will become much more dependent on statutory protections and collective bargaining agreements to protect them from arbitrary personnel decisions.
American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees. (2008). Public sector collective bargaining laws. Retrieved August 30, 2008, from http://www.afscme.org/members/11075.cfm
2.
Bartell v. Aurora Public Schools, 263 F.3d 1143 (2001).
3.
Bishop v. Wood, 426 U.S. 341 (1976).
4.
Board of Regents v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564 (1972).
5.
Branti v. Finkel, 445 U.S. 507 (1980).
6.
Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954).
7.
Campagna v. Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, 334 F.3d 150 (1st Cir. 2003).
8.
CBOCS W. Inc. v. Humphries, 2008 LEXIS 4516 (2008).
9.
Central State University v. American Association of University Professors, 526 U.S. 124 (1999).
10.
Cleveland Board of Education v. Loudermill, 470 U.S. 532 (1985).
11.
Cooper, P.J. (1982). Due process, the Burger court, and public administration . Southern Review of Public Administration, 6, 43-65.
12.
Developments in the law: Public employment. (1984). Harvard Law Review, 97, 1611-1800.
13.
Dotson, A. (1955). The emerging doctrine of privilege in public employment . Public Administration Review, 15, 77-88.
14.
Drachsler, D.A. (2008). Public employee whistleblowers after Garcetti v. Ceballos. Labor Law Journal, 59, 201-208.
15.
Eggleston v. Bieluch, 203 Fed. Appx. 257 (11th Cir. 2006).
16.
Elfbrandt v. Russell, 384 U.S. 1 (1966).
17.
Elrod v. Burns, 427 U.S. 347 (1976).
18.
Engquist v. Oregon Department of Agriculture, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18844 (D. Or. Sept 14, 2004).
19.
Engquist v. Oregon Department of Agriculture, 478 F.3d 985 (2007).
20.
Engquist v. Oregon Department of Agriculture, 128 S.Ct. 977 (2008a).
21.
Engquist v. Oregon Department of Agriculture, 128 S.Ct. 2146 (2008b).
22.
Federal Express v. Holowecki, 128 S. Ct. 1147 (2008).
23.
Garcetti v. Ceballos, 126 S.Ct. 1951 (2006).
24.
Gehan, S.M. (2002). With malice toward one: Malice and substantive law in "class of one" equal protection claims in wake of Village of Willowbrook v. Olech. Maine Law Review, 54, 329-386.
25.
Givhan v. Western Line Consolidated School District, 439 U.S. 410 (1979).
26.
Goldman, D.D. (1981). Due process and public personnel management. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 2, 19-28.
27.
Gomez-Perez v. Potter, 128 S. Ct. 1931 (2008).
28.
Hayford, S.L. (1985). First amendment rights of government employees: A primer for public officials. Public Administration Review , 45, 241-248.
29.
Hill v. Borough of Kutztown, 455 F.3d 225 (3rd Cir. 2006).
30.
Jackson v. Norman, 264 Fed. Appx. 17 (1st Cir. 2008).
31.
Kodrea v. City of Kokomo, 458 F. Supp. 2d 857 (2006).
32.
Lauth v. McCollum, 434 F.3d 631 (7th Cir. 2005).
33.
Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 550 U.S. ___ , 127 S.Ct. 2162 (2007).
34.
Lee, C.K.Y. (1988). Freedom of speech in the public workplace: A comment on the public concern requirement. California Law Review, 76, 1109-1146.
35.
Marwood v. Elizabeth Forward School Dist., 91 Fed. Appx. 207 (3rd Cir. 2004).
36.
Massachusetts Board of Retirement v. Murgia, 427 U.S. 304 (1976).
37.
Matsey v. Westmoreland County, 185 Fed. Appx. 126 (3rd Cir. 2006).
38.
McAuliffe v. Mayor of New Bedford, 155 Mass. 216, 29 N.E. 517 (1892).
39.
Mosca v. Cole, 217 Fed. Appx. 158 (3rd Cir. 2007).
40.
Nasuti, J.L.Y. (2008). Garcetti et al. v. Ceballos-A reworking of first amendment free speech rights for public employees. North East Journal of Legal Studies, 20, 55-82.
41.
National Treasury Employees Union v. Von Raab, 489 U.S. 656 (1989).
42.
O'Brien, D.M. (1987). The Supreme Court from Warren to Burger to Rehnquist . PS: Political Science and Politics, 20, 12-20.
43.
O'Connor v. Ortega, 480 U.S. 709 (1987).
44.
Pickering v. Board of Education, 391 U.S. 563 (1968).
45.
Rankin v. McPherson, 483 U.S. 378 (1987).
46.
Riccucci, N.M. (2008). A major setback for pay equity: The Supreme Court's decision in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 28, 91-96.
47.
Roback, T.H., & Vinzant, J.C. (1994). The constitution and the patronage-merit debate: Implications for personnel management. Public Personnel Management , 23, 501-514.
48.
Rosenbloom, D.H. (1975). Public personnel administration and the constitution: An emergent approach. Public Administration Review, 35, 52-59.
49.
Rosenbloom, D.H. (1978). The Burger court and the public employee. Southern Review of Public Administration, 2, 239-244.
50.
Rosenbloom, D.H. (1981). The sources of continuing conflict between the constitution and public personnel management. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 2, 3-19.
51.
Rosenbloom, D.H. (1983). What every public personnel manager should know about the constitution. In S. Hays & R. C. Kearney (Eds.), Public personnel administration: Problems and prospects (pp. 27-42). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
52.
Rosenbloom, D.H. (1988). The public employment relationship and the Supreme Court. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 8, 49-56.
53.
Rosenbloom, D.H. (2003). Administrative law for public managers. Boulder, CO: Westview.
54.
Rosenbloom, D.H., & Bailey, M. (2003). What every public personnel manager should know about the constitution. In S. Hays & R. C. Kearney (Eds.), Public personnel administration: Problems and prospects (4th ed., pp. 29-45). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
55.
Rutan v. Republican Party of Illinois, 497 U.S. 62 (1990).
56.
Sellers v. City of Gary, 453 F.3d 848 (7th Cir. 2006).
57.
Stotter v. University of Texas, 508 F.3d 812 (5th Cir. 2007).
58.
Teigen v. Renfrow, 511 F.3d 1072 (10th Cir. 2007).
59.
United States v. Buffalo, 457 F. Supp. 612 (1978).
60.
United States v. National Treasury Employees Union, 513 U.S. 454 (1995).
61.
U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2008). Union membership summary. Union members in 2007 . Retrieved June 14, 2008, from http://www.bls.gov/news.release/union2.nr0.htm
62.
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. ( 2008). Federal equal employment opportunity (EE0) laws. Retrieved June 14, 2008, from http://www.eeoc.gov/abouteeo/overview_laws.html
63.
Van Alstyne, W.W. (1968). The demise of the right-privilege distinction in constitutional law. Harvard Law Review, 81, 1439-1464.
64.
Vigil v. S. Valley Acad., 247 Fed. Appex. 982 (3rd Cir. 2007).
65.
Village of Willowbrook v. Olech, 528 U.S. 562 (2000).
66.
Washington v. Davis, 426 U.S. 229 (1976).
67.
Waters v. Churchill, 511 U.S. 661 (1994).
68.
Wells, M.L. (2001). Section 1983, the first amendment, and public employee speech: Shaping the right to fit the remedy (and vice versa). Georgia Law Review, 35, 939-1017.
69.
Whiting v. University of Southern Mississippi, 451 F.3d 339 (5th Cir. 2006).
70.
Williams v. Riley, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 8990 (5th Cir. 2008).
