Kleberg County Attorney Kira Talip Sanchez is attacking a former employee's claims that the prosecutor fired him for speaking out about her alleged misuse of public funds, and for investigating her alleged sexual relationship with a coworker.

But plaintiff Thomas Roddy rebutted that on Wednesday. Instead, Roddy alleges Sanchez is placing her head in the sand regarding his allegations, by claiming he didn't raise enough specific allegations to support his claims. He counters that her filings have ignored important aspects of his pleading.

On one hand, the case traces the boundary between a government employee's right to voice concerns on important issues. And on the other, it wades into a public official's right to expect loyalty from employees, so that the government runs efficiently.

Sanchez, who has denied Roddy's allegations of impropriety, argued that Roddy didn't state plausible claims for retaliation. She argues that even if he had, the court doesn't have jurisdiction to take up one claim, and that qualified immunity shields her from others. Sanchez lays out the arguments in a Feb. 6 motion for judgment on the pleadings in Roddy v. Talip, pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas in Corpus Christi.

But her accuser disagrees.

"We believe the motion to dismiss is largely frivolous, and expect it to be denied," said an email by Jon Brooks, who represents Roddy.

|

Internal grievance or constitutional issue?

Roddy, the former commander of the South Texas Specialized Crimes and Narcotics Task Force, alleged in his lawsuit that he spoke out repeatedly about Sanchez's alleged misuse of his task force's property seizure fund. Sanchez was granting donation requests, typically between $500 to $5,000, to various Kingsville entities. She once gave $16,000 to King Ranch Security because she hoped to curry political favors, Roddy claimed. Roddy also alleged he had been investigating alleged improper sexual relationships in the workforce, including an alleged relationship between Sanchez and a task force agent under Roddy's supervision. He alleged he was fired in retaliation.

But Sanchez argued in her motion for judgment that Roddy's complaint didn't raise sufficient allegations to support a claim for retaliation in violation of the First Amendment. She argued that Roddy's lawsuit also failed to show that his speech was the thing that caused the alleged retaliation. Roddy's termination came more than one year after he'd raised concerns over how Sanchez was spending civil property forfeiture funds, according to the motion, according to court pleadings.

Sanchez also argued that Roddy's speech didn't cover a matter of public concern. Sanchez's perspective is Roddy was airing an internal grievance, saying that he wanted Sanchez to consult with him before making choices on spending the forfeiture funds. It's more of an employer-employee dispute, rather than something that deserves First-Amendment protection, the motion said.

The motion added that Sanchez had an important consideration in ensuring people in her office had close working relationships and she had their loyalty, which is crucial in public attorneys' offices. This interest, to make sure her office performed its public services efficiently, trumps Roddy's private speech concerns, she argued. Roddy had the type of job where it was reasonable for Sanchez to expect his political loyalty and adherence to her policy demands, Sanchez claimed.

In a Feb. 26 response to Sanchez's motion, Roddy rejected Sanchez's contention that his pleadings weren't sufficient to support his claims. He argued his termination closely followed his complaints about the funds and the investigation of the sexual allegations. Roddy said he was speaking out about the spending right up until the month he was fired. He argued that Sanchez's filings never fleshed out her claim that she fired Roddy for a legitimate, non-retaliatory reason.

According to Roddy's response, court precedent is clear that when an employee opposes misuse of public funds, that counts as speech about a matter of public concern.

Myra Morris, of counsel with Royston Rayzor in Corpus Christi, who represents Sanchez, didn't immediately return a call or email seeking comment.

Related story: