Sign up for our daily newsletter

Legal-Courts

Court asked to revisit 2008 case

Bob Kellogg   (OneNewsNow.com) Wednesday, January 09, 2013

The Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is being asked to rehear the case of a former University of Toledo human resources administrator who was fired for expressing her personal point of view on homosexuality.

Crystal Dixon, an African-American Christian upset by a 2008 op-ed piece in the Toledo Free Press equating the homosexual lifestyle to civil rights movement, submitted her own opinion to the paper to express her disagreement. She was promptly fired.

Muise, Robert (AFLC) 2Her attorney, Robert Muise of the American Freedom Law Center (AFLC), tells OneNewsNow a three-judge panel of the Sixth Circuit sided with the university.

"[They] held that she was under this presumption that they have that she was a confidential policy-making employee, and because of that, the government rights prevail as a matter of law," he explains.

But the AFLC is appealing to the full Sixth Circuit to rehear that decision.

"We're asking the full court to reconsider this presumption, which certainly abridges the fundamental right to freedom of speech and … doesn't take into account any of the public interests, the societal interests, and certainly not even our client's interest in the First Amendment," Muise states.

Because there is disagreement within the court of appeals as to how this presumption should be applied, or even if it should exist, Dixon's case has a better chance of being reviewed.

City and county officials of Jackson, Michigan, offered Dixon a position to serve as human resources director in 2011 -- an offer to which pro-homosexual groups objected based on the argument that her job history "indicates that she is not qualified to serve the needs of all of the families and residents she's charged with protecting."


We moderate all reader comments, usually within 24 hours of posting (longer on weekends). Please limit your comment to 300 words or less and ensure it addresses the article. Comments that contain a link (URL), an inordinate number of words in ALL CAPS, rude remarks directed at other readers, or profanity/vulgarity will not be approved. (More on this policy)
comments powered by Disqus