The following excerpt is from Specht v. The City of New York, 20-4211-cv (2nd Cir. 2021):
To survive a motion to dismiss, a plaintiff claiming that he was retaliated against in violation of the First Amendment must plausibly allege that (1) he engaged in speech or activity that was protected by the First Amendment; (2) he suffered an adverse employment action; and (3) a causal connection existed between the adverse action and the protected activity. Smith v. County of Suffolk, 776 F.3d 114, 118 (2d Cir. 2015). The speech of a public employee is protected by the First Amendment when the employee speaks as a citizen on a matter of public concern, rather than pursuant to his employment responsibilities. Garcetti, 547 U.S. at 420-21.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.