114 F.4th 25
1st Cir.2024Background
- Xiomara Santiago was hired in 2020 as Deputy Director of the Head Start Program in Utuado, Puerto Rico, under a transitory contract after applying for a posted vacancy.
- Following a mayoral election, Jorge Pérez Heredia (NPP) replaced Ernesto Irizarry Salvá (PDP) as mayor. Shortly after, Santiago, a known PDP supporter, was terminated from her position.
- Santiago claimed her firing was due to political discrimination (First Amendment) and violated her due process rights (Fourteenth Amendment), seeking a preliminary injunction for reinstatement.
- The new administration cited issues with her qualifications, English proficiency, job performance, and the need for staff reductions due to funding and program difficulties as reasons for her termination.
- The district court, adopting a magistrate’s report, denied the preliminary injunction, finding Santiago unlikely to succeed on either claim. Santiago appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Due Process (Property interest in employment) | Santiago had a property interest in her contract; no notice or opportunity to dispute the firing. | She lacked a property interest because she was unlawfully appointed and unqualified. | Plaintiff waived arguments; no protected interest; court affirms denial. |
| Proper law applicable to appointment | Lower court applied wrong (post-hire) Puerto Rico law; correct law would change result. | Law No. 107-2020 governed at contract signing; Santiago did not preserve new argument. | Argument waived for not being raised below; not reviewable. |
| Political Discrimination (First Amendment) | Her firing was politically motivated due to her PDP affiliation. | Termination was based on nonpolitical reasons: job performance, qualifications, program needs. | Insufficient evidence of political motivation; court affirms denial. |
| Preliminary injunction standard | She met likelihood of success and irreparable harm. | She failed to show likelihood of success on merits. | No likelihood of success on either claim; denial affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Cleveland Bd. of Educ. v. Loudermill, 470 U.S. 532 (procedural due process requires a protected property interest for public employees)
- Ocasio-Hernández v. Fortuño-Burset, 640 F.3d 1 (First Amendment prohibits firing based on political affiliation unless political loyalty is a job requirement)
- Borges Colón v. Román-Abreu, 438 F.3d 1 (transitory employees have property interests only within the contract’s fixed term, not beyond)
- Casiano-Montañez v. State Ins. Fund Corp., 707 F.3d 124 (protected property interest defined by state law and lawfully held career positions)
- Peguero-Moronta v. Santiago, 464 F.3d 29 (proving First Amendment political discrimination requires more than temporal proximity or speculation)