Non-tenured Teacher’s Freedom of Expression MT. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. Doyle Supreme Court of the United States, 1977 429 U.S. 274

FACTS Doyle was approved for hire as a teacher by the Board in 1966 where he worked under 1-year contracts for the first 3 years. 1969-1971 were worked under 2-year contracts was elected president of the Teacher’s Association & was involved in several incidents unrelated to his role as president

engaged in an argument w/another teacher which cased him to get slapped -refused an apology & was persistent in some form of punishment for the other teacher -both Doyle & teacher were suspended for 1 day. -several other teachers walked-out resulting in the lifting of the suspensions

Doyle argued with cafeteria workers over his portion size of spaghetti referred to students as “sons of bitches” made an obscene gesture to two girls because they failed to obey commands made a telephone call to WSAI in Cincinnati (local radio station) regarding a memo from the principal about teacher dress and appearance

Doyle along w/9 other teachers were not recommended for re-hire which was approved by the Board. Statements of reasons given include: --”a notable lack of tact in handling professional matters which leaves much doubt as to your sincerity in establishing good school relationships”

References were also made to the radio station and obscene gestures incidents.

ISSUES Was Doyle not rehired due to his exercising his First Amendment rights (calling the radio station)? Would the school board have rehired him even in “the absence of the protected conduct? Is the speech of a government employee a constitutionally protected expression?

HOLDING District Court found that the incidents did occur and that Doyle’s phone call to the radio station was protected by the First Amendment. Because it (phone call to radio station) had played a “substantial” role in the Board’s decision not to renew his contract, he was entitled to reinstatement with backpay. The Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit affirmed the judgement

The District Court concluded the following: “if a non-permissible reason played a substantial part in the decision not to renew-even in the face of other permissible grounds, the decision may not stand” In this case, a non-permissible reason did play a substantial part (evidenced by the Superintendent’s letter immediately following the Board’s decision); therefore, the court may not engage in any imitation of First Amendment rights based on ‘tact’

The Court also stated: “in fact, as this Court see it and finds, both the Board and the Superintendent were faced with a situation in which there did exist in fact reason…independent of any First Amendment rights or exercise thereof, to not extend tenure.” The Board could have legally dismissed Doyle had the radio station incident never come into play.

LEGAL DOCTRINE First Amendment to the United States Constitution which states: Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech or of the press…

SIGNIFICANCE A district employee (teacher) can be legally dismissed if the Board/Superintendent do not put in writing the reasons for their decision.