Walton V. Safir, 122 F. Supp.2d 466 (s.d.n.y. 2000), Case Study Example

Title and Citation: Walton v. Safir, 122 F. Supp.2d 466 (S.D.N.Y. 2000)

Type of Action: Plaintiff Yvette Walton, a police officer with twelve years of servicefiled a civil suit against the defendant Howard Safir, the former Commissioner of the New York City Police Department. Plaintiff Walton claimed that the defendant dismissedher in response to her criticism of the Street Crime Unit’sracially discriminatory policies.

Facts of the Case: Plaintiff Walton was a member of the NYPD’s Street Crime Unit (SCU) whose responsibilities included searching for and apprehending drug dealers, illegal guns possessors, and perpetrators of violent crimes. Officer Walton was the only African American assigned to street patrols. She gained eighteen commendations for her work but in March 1995, she requested and was granted a transfer out of the unit. She made the request because she believed the unit engaged in racially discriminatory practices in performing its duties.

When on February 4, 1999, a West African immigrant Amadou Diallo was shot and killed by SCU officers, Walton accepted the invitation of a group called 100 Blacks in Law Enforcement Who Care to speak against SCU officers and their discriminatory work tactics. Her press conferences aired on several New York television stations and she also testified before the New York City Council though she made sure to disguise her appearance each time. On April 19,1999 (the day she testified before the city council), when she contacted her command to request to be excused for the remainder of the day, she was informed of her dismissal, effective as of 4:00 p.m. that day.

Contentions of the Parties: Plaintiff Walton claimed that she was dismissed by Commissioner Safir in retaliation for exercising her constitutional right to free speech in speaking against the department. The plaintiff claimed that the Commissioner Safir and his executive staff knew about her identity even as she did her best to disguise her appearance. The defendants claimed they were neither aware nor concerned with the fact that the plaintiff criticized the department. Commissioner Safir argued that the plaintiff was dismissed for breaking the department’s regulations concerning sick leave during a term of probationary status.

Issue(s): Whether the plaintiff was dismissed for exercising her constitutional right to free speech as the plaintiff claims or the defendants rightfully dismissed her in light of work performance related issues?

Decision: The judge reached the conclusion that the plaintiff was dismissed in retaliation for the exercise of her First Amendment rights. Thus, the plaintiff Walton won the case.

Reasoning: The judge observed that the plaintiff had a superior performance record. The judge found it odd that despite NYPD’s commitment to recruiting African-American officers, an experienced and able 12-year veteran was dismissed without a hearing and in a manner inconsistent with the applicable regulations and the department’s own practices. The judge found that the department didn’t follow standard rules in dismissing the plaintiff. In addition, the reasons cited for the plaintiff’s dismissal were regarded by the department as minor infractions of the type that would normally have led to command disciplines, not dismissal, even of an officer in probationary status.

Rule of Law: Government employees also have a First Amendment right to speak and can engage in public criticism of the agencies for which they work.