Man who burned Koran at Ground Zero fired from job as New Jersey Transit employee
We read:
"The man captured on camera ripping pages out of a Koran and burning them near Ground Zero in lower Manhattan on Saturday - the ninth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks - was fired from his job at NJ Transit, the New Jersey transportation provider said.
NJ Transit said that Derek Fenton's "public actions" violated its code of ethics and that he “violated his trust as a state employee."
In response to questions from NewsCore today, NJ Transit released a statement saying: “Derek Fenton was terminated on September 13, 2010 from his employment at NJ TRANSIT. An at-will employee, Mr Fenton’s public actions violated New Jersey Transit’s code of ethics."
Source
I would like to see where in the alleged code of ethics it says that you cannot burn pages out of a book
21 comments:
A First Amendment retaliation suit in 3, 2, 1...
Nope, doesn't matter. If he is employed in an "at-will" state, he's screwed, plain and simple.
Actually, unless he was wearing a transit system uniform, he cannot be fired by the Transit System (a government agency) for his PRIVATE, PROTECTED speech.
He's got a big fat lawsuit if he wants it, and the ACLU would probably take this one.
The transit authority screwed up by claiming it violated their code and then trying to hide behind at will. If you let someone go for at will you just say that you are letting them go and not give them a reason. But once you give a reason as they did it isn't at will anymore it's for cause. If that cause violates the law which it may in this case under a first amendment claim, there may be a claim to be made in court against the employer.
I truly hope he wipes them out. ($$)
If he had burned a Bible, he probably would have gotten a big fat raise and a promotion!
Is this really a violation of his First Amendment? Is the NJ Transit a Federal Agency? Did Congress make a law to fire the guy?
Too often today, people scream First Amendment violations that are really not First Amendment violations.
Should he have been fired for what he did in his private time? NO. Does he have grounds to fight his firing? YES. Was this a First Amendment Violation? NO.
I don't see a 1st Amendment issue here but rather a private property issue. He destroyed his own property so what's the problem? If he had stolen the book and then damaged it, then there is a crime but I don't see that here.
had he burnt a Bible he'd have been promoted instead...
This is New Jersey after all, practically New Cordoba, where Sheikh Bloomberg has a 15 story victory mosque built on the corpses of the victims of 9/11.
Doug,
Was this a First Amendment Violation? NO.
Yes. The Supremacy Clause makes it so. While the First Amendment does say "Congress," the fact of the matter is that the original intention and the interpretation has always been that no government - federal, state, or local - has the right to abridge the right of free speech.
I'm confused...he works in NJ and was in NY on his own time doing what he wanted to do...?
Freethinker48
"Yes. The Supremacy Clause makes it so. While the First Amendment does say "Congress," the fact of the matter is that the original intention and the interpretation has always been that no government - federal, state, or local - has the right to abridge the right of free speech."
This doesn't seem to hold, given that there was apparently no problem with States establishing particular religious sects in their state constitutions. Do you have a source for this?
In Australia he would sue for unfair dismissal on the grounds that the dismissal was not work performance related and therefore illegal.
He also would have the right to burn the Koran but may come unstuck in Victoria when 3 priests where imprisoned by a special committee for reading the bad aspects of the Koran to a private audience because it offended the local muslims. Our politicians didn't have the guts to put it to the courts so did it in house instead.
Wow reading the Koran offends Muslims!
Do you have a source for this?
Yes. The Supremacy Clause.
What does the Supremacy Clause actually say? How does the logic work? What are the historical events which support your claim that it's a historical precedent?
Anon 11:48
Infidels reading the Koran offends the muslims.
Many countries around the world are under assualt indirectly by the Islamic world. Just read the world news section in your news paper or find a relible world news source online.
What does the Supremacy Clause actually say?
If you don't know and are too lazy to look it up, then this conversation is a waste of time.
If you do know, and are just being obtuse then this conversation is a waste of time as well.
You might consider these two posts of mine in which I link the state ethics code and discuss two posisble theories as to why he was fired -- and why they both would be travesties.
http://rhymeswithright.mu.nu/archives/305781.php
http://rhymeswithright.mu.nu/archives/305742.php
The is clearly a 1th Amendment violation. Section 1 of the 14th Amendment extends those protections to include violations by all levels of government, not just the federal government.
ljcass
Anon 5:32,
I'm well aware that there's a supremacy clause in the Constitution, but what it actually says does not match up with your claim. That's why I'm challenging you on it. I don't think you are able to make such a case, and your obvious evasion only reinforces that perception.
In fact, I had made a very similar challenge about the 14th Amendment in an earlier thread and it was ignored there too.
Post a Comment