Jane Sullivan, et al v. University of Washington

Under Garcetti, only “when an employee speaks as a citizen addressing a matter of public concern” do the Supreme Court’s “cases indicate that the First Amendment may be implicated.” Kennedy v. Bremerton Sch. Dist., 142 S. Ct. 2407, 2423 (2022)

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (“PETA”) filed an interlocutory appeal regarding a grant of and a preliminary injunction. PETA filed a public records request (PRA) for letters appointing UW Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee members serving to ensure University of Washington (“UW”) research facilities comply with the Animal Welfare Act (“AWA”). Committee members filed a class action seeking a temporary restraining order (“TRO”), preliminary injunction, and declaratory judgment under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The complaint alleged the PRA would violate Committee members’ right of expressive association under the federal and state constitutions in revealing identifying information. The district court granted Committee members’ motion a preliminary injunction. Under Garcetti, only “when an employee speaks as a citizen addressing a matter of public concern” do the Supreme Court’s “cases indicate that the First Amendment may be implicated.” Kennedy v. Bremerton Sch. Dist., 142 S. Ct. 2407, 2423 (2022). The Court held that appointee’s First Amendment rights are not violated, because performance of official duties is not protected by the right of expressive association under the First Amendment. The Court reasoned that Committee members are analogous to public employees acting in an official capacity, their speech and association is not the type protected by the right of expressive association. REVERSED AND REMANDED.