Running Head: Supreme Court Cases 1

Griffin v. Freddie Watts and Jimmy Brothers

Nina Spitler

College of Southern Nevada

Running Head: Supreme Court Cases 2

Abstract

In this case, Ann Griffin was having a heated discussion with her administrators and she stated

that she “hates all black folks.” After word about her comment leaked, she was having

differences with her colleagues. Her administrators terminated her in her position. With the court

cases Melzer v. Board of Education of the City School Dictrict of the City of New York and the

case of Lincoln Brown v. Chicago Board of Education I showed how they relate to the case of

Ann Griffin and her termination. They relate in the sense that her comments impede her from

performing her job and effectiveness as a teacher. I also used the court cases Presidik v. Spokane

School District No. 81 and Givhan v. Western Line Consolidated School District to show that

Ann Griffin’s privacy and confidentiality rights were violated when the information of her

conversation with her administrators was leaked and to show the possibility of the violation of

her first amendment. With my understanding so far, I think the Supreme Court will rule against

Ann Griffin because of her inability of performing an unbiased job because of her beliefs.
Running Head: Supreme Court Cases 3

Griffin v. Freddie Watts and Jimmy Brothers

Freddie Watts and Jimmy Brothers are both administrators at a mostly all black high

school. Freddie Watts is the principal and Jimmy Brothers is the assistant principal. Both

administrators are African American. Ann Griffin is a white teacher, currently teaching at the

high school. During a heated conversation between Ann and the two administrators, Ann said, “I

hate all black folks.” Word got around about what Ann had said and it started creating conflict

between Ann and both, white and black co-workers. The principal is concerned with Ann’s

ability to treat students fairly and her judgment and competency as a teacher. He has

recommended dismissing her.

In the case Melzer v. Board of Education of the City School District of the City of New

York, a teacher was terminated because of his membership to the North American Man/Boy

Love Association. The court believed that his association impedes Melzer from being an

effective teacher and could cause disruption to his teaching. The ruled the termination rightful.

(Underwood & Webb 2003, p. 50) I believe this relates to the court case above because Ann’s

views can intervene with her effectiveness as a teacher and students may not feel comfortable

with her views. Her views against African Americans could impede with her way of teaching and

cause disruptions.

In the case Lincoln Brown v. Chicago Board of Education, Brown, a sixth grade teacher

caught two students passing notes during his lesson, while he was being observed by the

principal. The note had the racial word “nigger” written in it as part of a song lyric. Brown took

that moment as a teaching moment and used his lesson to teach about why that word should not
Running Head: Supreme Court Cases 4

be used and why it hurts. The principal fired Brown for using such language during a lesson to

the students. Brown sued the board or education under the first amendment but did not win

because; the first amendment is protected if the employee “spoke as a citizen on a matter of

public concern.” (Wood, 2016, p. 4) I believe this case relates to Griffin’s because in her

situation she was not speaking as a citizen on a public concern, she was speaking from personal

opinion in her work place; therefore, I believe her first amendment rights have not been violated.

In the case of Anthony J. Predisik and Christopher Katke v. Spokane School District No.

81, Anthony and Christopher were both long time school district employees. During an

investigation of misconduct, while they were both of paid leave, the school district released

records regarding the employees to local media. The former employees sued the school for

releasing their records and violating their confidentiality. The Court ruled that although the

records themselves were public records, the employees’ names must be redacted. (Madsen, C.J.

Johnson, Stephens, and Gonzalez, JJ., 2015, p. 6) I believe this case relates to Ann Griffin’s case

because it says that after word got around, colleagues started having different vies and issues

towards Ann. The argument between the teacher and the administrators was confidential and the

information should have never been spread. By the administrators telling other employees about

Ann’s comment, they are violating Ann’s confidentiality rights and privacy rights.

In the case of Givhan v. Western Line Consolidated School District, Bessie Givhan made

some racist comments in private to her supervisor. She was terminated from her job as a middle

school English teacher. Givhan sued the school under the violation of her first amendment. She

won the case and it was ruled that,” A public employee does not forfeit his First Amendment

protection against governmental abridgment of freedom of speech when he arranges to

communicate privately with his employer, rather than to express his views publicly.” (Rehnquist,
Running Head: Supreme Court Cases 5

1979, p. 439) I believe this relates to Ann’s case because Ann expressed her views privately with

her supervisors, rather than making her comment publicly.

With what I have learned from this chapter and reading different court cases, I believe

the Supreme Court will rule against Ann Griffin. Her comment regarding African Americans

suggests that she feels a certain way about a certain race. That implies that her personal views

could interfere with the way she performs her job. Like in the case above, Melzer v. Board of

Education of the City School District of the City of New York, I think Ann would lose her case

because Ann’s views can intervene with her effectiveness as a teacher and students may not feel

comfortable with her views. After the Supreme Court ruling, Ann Griffin would be terminated

from her position.

Running Head: Supreme Court Cases 6

REFERENCES

Underwood, J., & Webb, L. D. (2003). School law for teachers concepts and applications (fourth

ed., pp. 49). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education Inc.

WOOD, . (2016, June 2). Lincoln Brown, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Chicago Board of Education,

Defendant-Appellee. In Findlaw. Retrieved from https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-

circuit/1737544.html

Madsen, ., Johnson, C. J., Stephens, ., & Gonzalez, J. J. (2015, April 2). Anthony J. Presidik and

Christopher Katke, Petitioners, v. Spokane School District No. 81, Respondent. In Findlaw.

Retrieved from https://caselaw.findlaw.com/wa-supreme-court/1697028.html

Rhenquist, J., & Stevens, J. (1979, January 9). Givhan v. Western Line Cons. Sch. Dist., 439

U.S. 410 (1979). In Justia U.S. Supreme Court. Retrieved from

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/439/410/