Federal Judge: Rules Cited in Atlanta Fire Chief's Firing Not Constitutional
But U.S. District Judge Leigh May ruled in the city's favor on several other constitutional issues raised by former chief Kelvin Cochran in a lawsuit filed against the city and Mayor Kasim Reed.
December 21, 2017 at 10:34 AM
4 minute read
Rules cited in the dismissal of an Atlanta fire chief that require city employees to get preclearance for outside employment are not constitutional, a federal judge ruled Wednesday.
But U.S. District Judge Leigh May ruled in the city's favor on a number of other constitutional issues raised by former chief Kelvin Cochran in a lawsuit filed against the city and Mayor Kasim Reed.
Cochran's dismissal in January 2015 came after he wrote a book called “Who Told You That You Were Naked?” for a men's Bible study. Cochran self-published the book in late 2013 and gave it to some subordinates at work.
The book includes passages that say gay people and those who have sex outside of marriage are “naked,” meaning they are wicked, ungodly sinners. Cochran claimed he was fired because of his religious beliefs.
May wrote that the city did not retaliate against Cochran in violation of his rights to free speech or free association. The judge also wrote that the city did not discriminate against him based on his viewpoint, did not violate his right to free exercise of religion and did not violate his due process rights.
But she ruled that the city's preclearance rules could stifle speech unconstitutionally and that they failed to define the standards to be used when judging a potential conflict of interest.
An assistant chief who had been given a copy of the book raised concerns in October 2014 about some of the book's statements on homosexuality, especially since Cochran clearly identified himself in the book as Atlanta's fire chief.
The following month, Reed suspended Cochran for 30 days without pay to discipline him for selling his book without providing proper notice or obtaining written approval, city attorneys have said. The city law department also opened an investigation into whether Cochran had improperly imposed his views in the workplace. Cochran was told not to make public comments on his suspension, city attorneys have said.
But Cochran spoke out, saying publicly that he'd been fired for his religious beliefs. He also helped organize a public relations campaign to challenge his suspension, leading to the mayor receiving more than 17,000 angry emails, some of them using racial slurs, city attorneys have said.
Both sides claimed victory Wednesday.
“The significance of this claim is actually very broad because it has profound implications for other employees in the city of Atlanta,” said Kevin Theriot, an attorney for Alliance Defending Freedom, which represents Cochran.
May's ruling shows that it's unconstitutional to require a city employee to get preclearance to write a book or speak outside of work and to get paid for that effort, Theriot said in a phone interview.
“Now that rule is gone,” he said. “So I think from a broad, First Amendment, free speech perspective, this is a very significant ruling for the employees of Atlanta.”
Theriot said the parties now need to get together to decide what is owed Cochran in terms of damages on the claims he won and present an order to the judge.
But the city sees May's ruling differently. City attorney Jeremy Berry said in an emailed statement that the city looks forward to demonstrating at trial the need for and propriety of its conflict of interest and outside employment preclearance rules.
Berry also said the ruling signifies that Reed acted lawfully and appropriately in firing Cochran. He applauded the judge for deciding in the city's favor on major constitutional issues.
“This lawsuit was never about religious beliefs or the First Amendment,” Berry said. “Rather, it is an employment matter involving an executive in charge of more than 1,100 firefighters and tasked to lead by example.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
Fowler White Burnett Opens Jacksonville Office Focused on Transportation Practice
3 minute readOn The Move: Polsinelli Adds Health Care Litigator in Nashville, Ex-SEC Enforcer Joins BCLP in Atlanta
6 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250