← All Authorities
United States Leading Case convention rightsrule of law

Lane v Franks

573 U.S. 228 (2014)
JurisdictionUnited States
CourtUS Supreme Court
Year2014
StatusBinding authority

Summary

A public employee's truthful sworn testimony in judicial proceedings constitutes protected citizen speech under the First Amendment, outside the Garcetti 'job duties' exception.

Key Principle

public employee speech; truthful testimony in judicial proceedings is citizen speech protected by First Amendment; Garcetti exception does not apply to sworn testimony

Area of Law

constitutional

Related Cases

NZYQ v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs (2023) 97 ALJR 1005

Indefinite administrative detention of a non-citizen with no real prospect of removal is unlawful as punitive and contrary to Ch III of the Australian Constitution, overruling Al-Kateb v Godwin.

Farm Transparency International v NSW (2022) 276 CLR 81

HCA upheld NSW ag-gag laws as valid notwithstanding a burden on the implied freedom of political communication, applying the structured proportionality test.

Palmer v Western Australia (2021) 272 CLR 505

HCA upheld WA COVID-19 border closure legislation as valid under s.92, finding restrictions on interstate movement were reasonably necessary and proportionate to protect public health.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Lane v Franks and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Lane v Franks