Legal News

New York Court Defines First Amendment for NYPD Employees
Download PDF
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)

On Thursday, Manhattan federal court Judge Barbara Jones dismissed a lawsuit brought by a NYPD officer alleging punishment by superiors because of his criticism of unfair quotas for arrests, stop-and-frisks and summonses. The court held that the actions of officer Craig Matthews were not protected by the First Amendment, because he performed them in the role of a NYPD officer and not a general citizen.

Craig Matthews, a 14-year veteran of NYPD and on the 42nd precinct filed his complaint both against the city and NYPD in February. He claimed that his supervisors had retaliated against him for criticizing an ever-worsening regime of illegal work quota, and that his supervisors had violated his First Amendment Rights.

However, the court held that though the concerns of the plaintiff were “a matter of public concern” the criticisms he had made were in the capacity of his job-role and therefore not protected by the First Amendment.


The court distinguished the situation of Matthews from an earlier case where an officer was entitled to First Amendment protections when he refused to make false statements, and was dismissed by superiors. In that case, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had held that the First Amendment protected the actions of a NYPD officer when he denounced the use of excessive force by his colleague, and was later dismissed because he did not withdraw his complaint.

The Court of Appeals, in the case of Jason Jackler v. Matthew Byrne et al, 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 10-0859, found that “the First Amendment protects the rights of a citizen to refuse to retract a report to the police that he believes is true, to refuse to make a statement that he believes is false, and to refuse to engage in unlawful conduct by filing a false report with the police.”

However, in the present case the court held that the matters criticized by Matthews could not have been criticized by anyone in the capacity and role of a general citizen. Though the criticized matters and practices are of public concern, they are not open to criticism by someone acting in the capacity of a citizen. Therefore Matthews acted in his capacity of a NYPD officer and not as an ordinary citizen and did not merit the protection of the First Amendment in the instant case.

Get JD Journal in Your Mail

Subscribe to our FREE daily news alerts and get the latest updates on the most happening events in the legal, business, and celebrity world. You also get your daily dose of humor and entertainment!!

The case is Craig Matthews v. The City of New York, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, no. 12-1354.


Interesting Legal Sites You May Like




Search Now

Mid-level Litigation Attorney

USA-CA-San Francisco

San Francisco office is seeking a mid-level litigation attorney with experience taking/defending dep...

Apply Now

Trust and Estate Attorney

USA-NY-New York City

Boutique trust and estate firm is seeking an attorney with 7+ years of experience. Candidate should ...

Apply Now

Mid-level Litigation Attorney

USA-CA-San Francisco

San Francisco office is seeking a support attorney with some experience/familiarity with a litigatio...

Apply Now



Wheeling office of our client seeks attorney preferably with 1-3 years of WV litigation experience. ...

Apply Now


Associate Attorney


An Associate Attorney is sought for a growing real estate, trusts and estate planning firm in Prince...

Apply now

Associate - Mid-Level - GL Group


Defense firm seeking mid-level associate for Westchester office to fill General Liability position. ...

Apply now

Mortgage Compliance Analyst


Job Description: Rubicon Mortgage Advisors LLC, a locally-owned, boutique mortgage lender is seeki...

Apply now

Litigation Legal Assistant

USA-CA-Los Angeles

Qualifications: Candidate should have 2+ years of previous experience supporting multiple atto...

Apply now


To Top