Penny Corn v. MS Dept of Public Safety, et, 954 F.3d 268

Background

Plaintiffs Penny Nichols Corn (Office Director / Governor’s representative) and Twyla Jennings (Division Director) worked for Mississippi Department of Public Safety (MDPS).
They learned of an MDPS internal affairs probe into ‘ghost tickets’—falsified traffic citations issued to obtain NHTSA grant overtime funds.
Corn reported the investigation internally to MDPS officials and externally to NHTSA; NHTSA allegedly cut grant funding afterward.
Corn was terminated in mid-October 2016 and Jennings was terminated the following month; no reasons were provided in the complaint.
Plaintiffs sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for First Amendment retaliation and under the Mississippi Tort Claims Act for wrongful discharge; the district court granted defendants’ motions for judgment on the pleadings.
The Fifth Circuit affirmed, holding the suit barred in part by Eleventh Amendment immunity and that Plaintiffs failed to plead protected First Amendment speech.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Eleventh Amendment immunity for MDPS and official-capacity claims	Plaintiffs sought injunctive and declaratory relief against MDPS and officials; argue immunity does not bar relief here	MDPS and officials are arms of the state; sovereign immunity bars suits for damages and most injunctive relief absent waiver or abrogation	MDPS and official-capacity claims are barred by Eleventh Amendment except for certain prospective relief under Ex parte Young; dismissal affirmed
Ex parte Young exception for prospective relief/reinstatement	Plaintiffs sought reinstatement and declaratory relief asserting ongoing violation	Defendants: Ex parte Young inapplicable to retrospective relief; officials not subject to suit for past state-law violations	Ex parte Young does not permit retrospective declaratory relief for 2016 terminations; reinstatement claims as prospective equitable relief may proceed against officials but declaratory relief was retrospective and barred
MTCA/state-law claims and personal liability of Commissioner Cruz	Plaintiffs sought damages and injunction under MTCA against MDPS and Cruz	State preserved sovereign immunity in federal court via MTCA; MTCA bars personal liability for acts within scope of employment	MTCA claims against MDPS and official-capacity claims barred; Cruz not personally liable for acts within scope of his duties; dismissal affirmed
First Amendment retaliation — whether speech was as citizen or employee	Plaintiffs: reporting to NHTSA and MDPS was citizen speech on public concern, protected from retaliation	Defendants: reporting was within Plaintiffs’ job duties and an internal up-the-chain report, so unprotected under Garcetti	Court held speech was made pursuant to official duties and was a continuation of internal job-related complaints; Plaintiffs failed to plead protected speech and §1983 claim dismissed

Key Cases Cited

P.R. Aqueduct & Sewer Auth. v. Metcalf & Eddy, 506 U.S. 139 (1993) (Eleventh Amendment immunity extends to state agencies and ‘‘arms of the state’’)
Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908) (doctrine permitting prospective injunctive relief against state officials for ongoing federal violations)
Verizon Maryland Inc. v. Pub. Serv. Comm’n of Maryland, 535 U.S. 635 (2002) (Ex parte Young requires an ongoing violation of federal law and prospective relief)
Pennhurst State Sch. & Hosp. v. Halderman, 465 U.S. 89 (1984) (federal courts may not adjudicate claims to enforce state law against state officials)
Garcetti v. Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410 (2006) (public employees’ statements pursuant to official duties are not protected by the First Amendment)
Warnock v. Pecos Cty., 88 F.3d 341 (5th Cir. 1996) (Ex parte Young may permit reinstatement remedies)
Anderson v. Valdez, 845 F.3d 580 (5th Cir. 2016) (speech is pursuant to official duties when made in course of performing employment)
Davis v. McKinney, 518 F.3d 304 (5th Cir. 2008) (up-the-chain, job-related communications are generally unprotected)