Connick v. Myers
E666869
Connick v. Myers is a 1983 U.S. Supreme Court case that limited public employees’ First Amendment protections by holding that their speech is only constitutionally protected when it addresses matters of public concern rather than personal workplace grievances.
All labels observed (1)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Connick v. Myers canonical | 2 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T7476388 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Connick v. Myers Context triple: [Borough of Duryea v. Guarnieri, relatedCase, Connick v. Myers]
-
A.
Myers v. United States
Myers v. United States is a 1926 U.S. Supreme Court case that significantly expanded presidential power by holding that the president has the exclusive authority to remove executive branch officials without Senate approval.
-
B.
Argersinger v. Hamlin
Argersinger v. Hamlin is a 1972 U.S. Supreme Court case that extended the right to counsel to defendants in misdemeanor cases that may result in imprisonment.
-
C.
McDonald v. Smith
McDonald v. Smith is a 1985 U.S. Supreme Court case that held the First Amendment’s Petition Clause does not grant absolute immunity from libel suits for statements made in petitions to government officials.
-
D.
Corrigan v. Buckley
Corrigan v. Buckley is a 1926 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld the enforceability of racially restrictive covenants in property deeds, paving the way for widespread legalized housing segregation until later overturned in effect by subsequent civil rights rulings.
-
E.
Miller v. Johnson
Miller v. Johnson is a 1995 U.S. Supreme Court case that further developed the doctrine on racial gerrymandering and the Equal Protection Clause in legislative redistricting.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NED2
Entity disambiguation (via description)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Connick v. Myers Target entity description: Connick v. Myers is a 1983 U.S. Supreme Court case that limited public employees’ First Amendment protections by holding that their speech is only constitutionally protected when it addresses matters of public concern rather than personal workplace grievances.
-
A.
Myers v. United States
Myers v. United States is a 1926 U.S. Supreme Court case that significantly expanded presidential power by holding that the president has the exclusive authority to remove executive branch officials without Senate approval.
-
B.
Argersinger v. Hamlin
Argersinger v. Hamlin is a 1972 U.S. Supreme Court case that extended the right to counsel to defendants in misdemeanor cases that may result in imprisonment.
-
C.
McDonald v. Smith
McDonald v. Smith is a 1985 U.S. Supreme Court case that held the First Amendment’s Petition Clause does not grant absolute immunity from libel suits for statements made in petitions to government officials.
-
D.
Corrigan v. Buckley
Corrigan v. Buckley is a 1926 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld the enforceability of racially restrictive covenants in property deeds, paving the way for widespread legalized housing segregation until later overturned in effect by subsequent civil rights rulings.
-
E.
Miller v. Johnson
Miller v. Johnson is a 1995 U.S. Supreme Court case that further developed the doctrine on racial gerrymandering and the Equal Protection Clause in legislative redistricting.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (47)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
ⓘ
public employment law case ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
civil rights law
ⓘ
constitutional law ⓘ labor and employment law ⓘ |
| arguedDate | 1982-11-08 ⓘ |
| citation | 461 U.S. 138 ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvision | First Amendment to the United States Constitution NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 1983-04-20 ⓘ |
| dissentingOpinionBy | William J. Brennan Jr. NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| fullName | Connick v. Myers NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| holding |
A public employee's speech is protected by the First Amendment only when it addresses a matter of public concern.
ⓘ
The employer's interest in maintaining discipline and harmony in the workplace outweighed the employee's limited First Amendment interest. ⓘ The questionnaire distributed by Myers, except for one question, involved internal office affairs and not matters of public concern. ⓘ When a public employee speaks on matters of purely personal interest, a federal court is not the appropriate forum to review the wisdom of a personnel decision taken in response. ⓘ |
| impact |
established threshold inquiry into whether employee speech involves a matter of public concern
ⓘ
narrowed First Amendment protections for public employees ⓘ |
| joinedDissent |
Harry A. Blackmun
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
John Paul Stevens NERFINISHED ⓘ Thurgood Marshall NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| joinedMajority |
Lewis F. Powell Jr.
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Sandra Day O'Connor NERFINISHED ⓘ Thurgood Marshall (in part) NERFINISHED ⓘ Warren E. Burger NERFINISHED ⓘ William H. Rehnquist NERFINISHED ⓘ William J. Brennan Jr. (in part) NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| jurisdiction | federal question jurisdiction ⓘ |
| keyConcept |
distinction between public concern and personal grievance
ⓘ
government employer's interest in workplace efficiency ⓘ public concern requirement for public employee speech ⓘ |
| legalIssue |
freedom of speech of public employees
ⓘ
public concern test for employee speech ⓘ |
| locationOfUnderlyingDispute | Orleans Parish District Attorney's Office, Louisiana NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| majorityOpinionBy | Byron R. White NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| originatedFrom | United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| page | 138 ⓘ |
| petitioner | Harry F. Connick, District Attorney NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| relatedCase |
Garcetti v. Ceballos
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Pickering v. Board of Education NERFINISHED ⓘ Rankin v. McPherson NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| relatedDoctrine | Pickering balancing test NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| reporter | United States Reports ⓘ |
| respondent | Sheila Myers NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| reversed | United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| volume | 461 ⓘ |
| yearDecided | 1983 ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
Instruction
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Input
Subject: Connick v. Myers Description of subject: Connick v. Myers is a 1983 U.S. Supreme Court case that limited public employees’ First Amendment protections by holding that their speech is only constitutionally protected when it addresses matters of public concern rather than personal workplace grievances.
Referenced by (2)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.