Court Says Cop's Criticism Isn't Protected Speech
Recent Cases
An Illinois State Police officer was not wrongfully transferred for accusing his superiors of sabotaging his investigation of a cold-case murder, the 7th Circuit ruled.
Plaintiff Michale Callahan filed a First Amendment retaliation claim against his superiors, Steven Fermon and Diane Carper.
Judge Ripple ruled that the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Garcetti v. Ceballos determined that the First Amendment did not protect the free speech of a public employee acting in his official capacity.
Callahan's investigation indicated that the two men serving life sentences for the murders could not have committed the crime. Callahan then came to believe that the real killer was a man who had made significant contributions to the campaigns of the attorney general and the governor.
Callahan alleged that when he told Fermon and Carper about the results of his investigation, he was asked to pursue lesser charges against the contributor and to stop investigating the murder because of the case's political sensitivity.
After tension became too high in the police department, Callahan was transferred to another precinct.
The trial court had ruled in favor of Callahan, and the Garcetti decision came down during the defendants' appeal.
Related listings
-
Ex-Lottery Commissioner Loses Conviction Appeal
Recent Cases 05/20/2008The 4th Circuit upheld the conviction and sentencing of ex-North Carolina lottery commissioner Kevin Geddings, who concealed the fact that he had a conflict of interest with a lottery vendor. A federal jury convicted Geddings of five counts of mail f...
-
Skycaps File National Class Action
Recent Cases 05/16/2008Employers are cheating airport skycaps nationwide by paying them less than minimum wage and discouraging tipping by charging a $2 per bag "baggage fee," which customers falsely believe will be given to the skycaps, the skycaps say in a federal class ...
-
Avandia Securities Class Action Dismissed
Recent Cases 05/15/2008A federal judge dismissed a shareholders' class-action complaint that accused GlaxoSmithKline of violating securities laws by withholding or manipulating information about its heart drug Avandia. U.S. District Judge Louis Stanton dismissed for failur...
USCIS Adjusting Premium Processing Fee
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced today it is adjusting the premium processing fee for Form I-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker and Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers beginning on Oct. 1, 2018 to more effectively adjudicate petitions and maintain effective service to petitioners.
The premium processing fee will increase to $1,410, a 14.92 percent increase (after rounding) from the current fee of $1,225. This increase, which is done in accordance with the Immigration and Nationality Act, represents the percentage change in inflation since the fee was last increased in 2010 based on the Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers.
“Because premium processing fees have not been adjusted since 2010, our ability to improve the adjudications and service processes for all petitioners has been hindered as we’ve experienced significantly higher demand for immigration benefits. Ultimately, adjusting the premium processing fee will allow us to continue making necessary investments in staff and technology to administer various immigration benefit requests more effectively and efficiently,” said Chief Financial Officer Joseph Moore. “USCIS will continue adjudicating all petitions on a case-by-case basis to determine if they meet all standards required under applicable law, policies, and regulations.”
Premium processing is an optional service that is currently authorized for certain petitioners filing Forms I-129 or I-140. The system allows petitioners to request 15-day processing of certain employment-based immigration benefit requests if they pay an extra fee. The premium processing fee is paid in addition to the base filing fee and any other applicable fees, which cannot be waived.