First Amendment topicsAbout the First Amendment
News Story
 
Correctional officer's free-speech claim gets go-ahead

By David Hudson
First Amendment Center
08.18.99

A lawsuit filed by a Colorado correctional officer who alleges she faced retaliation for speaking out against sexual harassment has been allowed to proceed by the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Louella Watkins, who worked at the Arkansas Valley Correctional Facility through March 1996, sued the Colorado Department of Corrections and two supervising officials, claiming sexual harassment and retaliation for the exercise of her free-speech rights.

Watkins contends that the defendants engaged in a number of retaliatory actions against her for reporting abuses against women and minorities in the workplace. She said that the defendants encouraged others to spy on her, searched her office, ostracized her and called her names after she complained.

Richard Marr and Joseph Paolino, the individual defendants named in the suit, filed a motion to dismiss, claiming qualified immunity. In a civil rights lawsuit, defendants are entitled to a qualified-immunity defense if they did not violate a clearly established constitutional right.

A federal court refused to grant the motion to dismiss, saying that the plaintiff's complaint alleged violations of clearly established constitutional rights.

On appeal, the 10th Circuit also refused to dismiss Watkins' complaint, writing: "Taking her [Watkins] statements as true, we conclude at this stage of the proceedings, plaintiff [Watkins] has adequately set forth sufficient facts showing the personal involvement of these defendants to survive a motion to dismiss."

The appeals court also noted in its Aug. 9 opinion in Watkins v. Colorado Department of Corrections that speaking out against matters of sexual discrimination is a clearly established constitutional right, which the defendants reasonably should have known.

A plaintiff in a First Amendment retaliation case must also establish that the speech she or he was allegedly punished for was on an important public issue or a "matter of public concern." The 10th Circuit stated that speaking out against sexual discrimination was clearly a matter of public concern.

Thomas J. Lyons, attorney for the two individual defendants, refused to speak about the case to the First Amendment Center, saying "I do not comment on pending litigation."

Calls placed to Watkins' attorney were not returned.


Related
News summary page
View the latest news stories throughout the First Amendment Center Online.

print this   Print


Last system update: Friday, November 14, 2008 | 01:58:59
 SEARCH  MORE
About this site
About the First Amendment
About the First Amendment Center
Video/RSS/podcasts
First Amendment programs
State of the First Amendment
reports

First Reports
Supreme Court
Experts
Columnists
First Amendment publications
First Amendment Center history
Glossary
Freedom Singsā„¢
Events
First Amendment
Schools

Congressional Research Service reports
Guest editorials
FOI material
The First Amendment
Library

Lesson plans
freedomforum.org
Newseum
Contact us
Privacy statement
Related links