Tag: free speech

Five Stories That Matter in Michigan This Week – June 30, 2023

  1. Michigan’s New Distracted Driving Law Takes Effect June 30

In an effort to mitigate the risks associated with distracted driving, Michigan recently enacted legislation meant to deter and punish instances of distracted driving. Michigan is the 26th state in the United States to pass a hands-free driving law, signifying the growing national consensus around the importance of focused driving.

Why it Matters: The new law, which takes effect June 30, 2023, makes holding and using a mobile electronic device while operating a motor vehicle illegal. Learn more about the new law from your Fraser Trebilcock attorney.

———

  1. Gain Peace of Mind Through Life’s Toughest Challenges

Family law involves deeply personal and often emotional issues – that can be as complicated as they are sensitive. A strong family law attorney understands the judicial processes and procedures, while also handling your case with care and compassion.

Why it Matters: Fraser Trebilcock attorney Paula C. Spicer has over a decade of experience assisting clients in family law matters. Paula compassionately and efficiently works with clients to help them understand their options and navigate the often challenging and emotional situations. Learn more how she may be able to assist.

———

  1. 6th Circuit Decision Clarifies Rights of Schools to Discipline Students for Off-Campus Speech and Conduct

In a case that involved a student creating a fake Instagram account impersonating a teacher, and the student being suspended by his school, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit clarified that schools can regulate student speech—even off-campus speech—that causes or can reasonably be forecast to cause substantial disruption to the educational environment.

Why it Matters: As this case (Kutchinski v Freeland Community School District) demonstrates, off-campus speech can easily make its way onto school grounds given the widespread use of social networks and other digital means of communication by students. While every case of discipline for off-campus speech must be evaluated pursuant to its own unique facts and circumstances, the Sixth Circuit affirmed a school’s rights to take disciplinary action under appropriate circumstances.

———

  1. Governor Whitmer Announces New Support Hubs for Small Businesses

On June 27, Governor Whitmer, along with the Michigan Economic Development Corporation, announced a new program aimed at supporting small businesses in the state by providing additional resources to them.

Why it Matters: The program is designed to allocate new and improved resources to small businesses through funding, direct support, and programming. Learn more about the new program.

———

  1. City of Detroit Approves Second Round of Recreational Cannabis Applications

On June 27, the Detroit City Council approved a second of three rounds of recreational cannabis applications to open up for submission.

Why it Matters: The second round will see a maximum of 50 applications for cannabis operations, broken down into the following categories: 15 adult-use retailer licenses, 15 adult-use equity retailer licenses, five microbusiness licenses, five microbusiness equity licenses, five designated consumption establishment licenses, and five designated consumption establishment equity licenses.

Related Practice Groups and Professionals

Insurance Law | Gary Rogers
Family Law | Paula Spicer
Business & Tax | Ed Castellani
Cannabis Law | Sean Gallagher

Sixth Circuit Allows Professor to Move Forward with Lawsuit Alleging University’s Preferred-Pronoun Policy Violates his Constitutional Rights

In a recent case with important implications for higher education institutions, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit held that a university professor plausibly pled claims that his employer’s enforcement of its policy requiring employees to refer to students by their preferred pronouns violated his constitutional rights under the free speech and free exercise clauses of the First Amendment.

The case, Meriwether v. Hartop, involves plaintiff Meriwether, a professor at defendant Shawnee State University (a public university). Meriwether, a devout Christian, sought a compromise with the university that would involve him using students’ preferred pronouns while placing a disclaimer in his syllabus, “noting that he was doing so under compulsion and setting forth his personal and religious beliefs about gender identity.” This proposed accommodation for Meriwether’s sincerely held religious beliefs was rejected by the university, which argued that the syllabus disclaimer, itself, would violate the policy.

In response to complaints filed by a transgender student of Meriwether, the university’s Title IX office conducted an investigation which concluded that Meriwether’s treatment of the transgender student, including refusing to use the student’s preferred pronoun, created a “hostile environment” violating the university’s non-discrimination policy. The university placed a written warning in Meriwether’s file, and Meriwether then brought suit against the university.

Meriwether argued that the university’s actions violated his rights under both the free speech and free exercise clauses of the First Amendment, and also asserted a due-process and equal-protection claims under the Fourteenth Amendment. His complaint was dismissed by an Ohio federal district court, and he appealed the decision, with the exception of the dismissal of the equal-protection claim, to the Sixth Circuit. The Sixth Circuit panel ruled that Meriwether’s case could proceed under both his free speech and free exercise claims.

With regard to the free speech claim, the Sixth Circuit panel ruled that the First Amendment protects the academic speech of university professors. In reaching this determination, the Sixth Circuit analyzed the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Garcetti v. Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410 (2006). In Garcetti, the Supreme Court held that, in normal circumstances, “when public employees make statements pursuant to their official duties, the employees are not speaking as citizens for First Amendment purposes, and the Constitution does not insulate their communications from employer discipline.” However, the Sixth Circuit held, in a decision consistent with the approach of the Fourth, Fifth, and Ninth Circuits, that the ruling in Garcetti does not apply in the academic context of a public university. Accordingly, the university violated Meriwether’s First Amendment rights.

As to the free exercise claim, the Sixth Circuit concluded that the university’s policy was not applied neutrally to religion as demonstrated by university officials showing hostility toward Meriwether’s religious beliefs and request for religious accommodation. As a result, the Sixth Circuit ruled that the university violated Meriwether’s free exercise rights.

Finally, the Sixth Circuit upheld the district court’s decision to dismiss Meriwether’s due process claim. Meriwether argued that the university’s policy violates due process because it is vague. However, the court found that Meriwether had notice of the policy and understood that it prohibited his conduct.

It is important to note that the Sixth Circuit’s ruling in this case only addressed the university’s motion to dismiss the complaint. Accordingly, for purposes of the appeal, Meriwether’s factual allegations were assumed to be true. He still has to prove his claims. However, the ruling does set important Sixth Circuit precedent affecting Michigan higher education institutions on issues of free speech and free exercise.

For any questions regarding this opinion, and how it may impact higher education institutions, please contact Ryan Kauffman.

Fraser Trebilcock Attorney Ryan Kauffman

Ryan K. Kauffman is a Shareholder at Fraser Trebilcock with more than a decade of experience handling complex litigation matters. You can contact him at rkauffman@fraserlawfirm.com or 517.377.0881.