Political support at work

When an employer demotes an employee out of a desire to prevent the employee from engaging in protected political activity, the employee is entitled to challenge that unlawful action under the First Amendment and §1983 even if, as here, the employer’s actions are based on a factual mistake about the employee’s behavior. To answer the question whether an official’s factual mistake makes a critical legal difference, the Court assumes that the activities that Heffernan’s supervisors mistakenly thought he had engaged in are of a kind that they cannot constitutionally prohibit or punish. For the purposes of this opinion, the Court has assumed that Heffernan’s employer demoted him out of an improper motive. However, the lower courts should decide in the first instance whether respondents may have acted under a neutral policy prohibiting police officers from overt involvement in any political campaign and whether such a policy, if it exists, complies with constitutional standards. 777 F. 3d 147, reversed and remanded.

Result

Reversed

The Court said an employee may challenge a demotion meant to stop protected political activity even if the employer mistakenly believes the employee engaged in it. It assumed the activity was protected and the motive improper, leaving lower courts to decide whether a neutral policy applied and was constitutional.

The lower courts must decide whether Paterson relied on a neutral rule barring police officers’ overt campaign involvement and, if so, whether that rule meets constitutional standards.