105 F.4th 868
6th Cir.2024Background
- Shannon Blick, a principal at an Ann Arbor elementary school, was placed on paid administrative leave in 2019 during an investigation into her approval of falsified timesheets by a custodian.
- Blick had previously been a highly regarded principal with no disciplinary record and alleged her assistant principal (Giles) had ulterior motives, including race-based favoritism for a replacement.
- While on leave, Blick was investigated for allegedly ignoring fraud warnings and for purported personal involvement with the custodian; she was later exonerated from criminal charges but her contract was not renewed.
- Blick sued, alleging First Amendment violations (speech and association), race discrimination under Title VII, Michigan law, and the Equal Protection Clause, due process violations, and conspiracy by district officials.
- The district court dismissed most claims at the pleading stage; the remainder (First Amendment) were dismissed on summary judgment. Blick appealed all adverse rulings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Prior restraint on speech | Barred from speaking about her leave/invest. | Only restricted discussion of investigation; not all speech | Dismissed – plaintiff failed to show what she wanted to say or that her specific speech was barred. |
| First Amendment retaliation | Harmful actions were retaliation for speech | No protected speech identified; no adverse action | Dismissed – plaintiff did not identify any protected speech triggering retaliation. |
| Freedom of association | Prevented from associating with parents/kids | Any burdens were not significant or not constitutionally cognizable | Dismissed – no significant burden proven; briefing forfeited some arguments. |
| Race discrimination (Title VII, Equal Protection, ELCRA) | Actions against Blick were motivated by race | Paid leave with full benefits is not adverse employment action | Dismissed – paid leave not adverse under established precedent; no sufficiently developed alternative theories. |
| Due process (pre-leave hearing) | Entitled to hearing before administrative leave | Paid leave does not implicate due process rights | Dismissed – no due process violation; claim forfeited by insufficient briefing. |
| Civil conspiracy under § 1983 | District officials conspired to violate rights | No specific agreement/intent alleged | Dismissed – Complaint was vague and conclusory, lacking specifics. |
Key Cases Cited
- Pickering v. Board of Education, 391 U.S. 563 (scope of First Amendment protection for public employees' speech)
- Garcetti v. Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410 (public employees' statements made pursuant to official duties are not protected speech)
- Connick v. Myers, 461 U.S. 138 (speech must be on matter of public concern to be constitutionally protected)
- Mt. Healthy City Sch. Dist. Bd. of Educ. v. Doyle, 429 U.S. 274 (burden shifting for causation in free speech retaliation)
- Monell v. Department of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658 (entity liability for unconstitutional policy or custom)
- White v. Burlington N. & Santa Fe Ry. Co., 364 F.3d 789 (paid administrative leave is not adverse employment action under Title VII)
- Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, 144 S. Ct. 967 (Title VII only requires "some harm," not significant harm, for actionable employer conduct)
- Roberts v. U.S. Jaycees, 468 U.S. 609 (expressive association under the First Amendment)