Opinion ID: 34845
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: analysis

Text: To establish a First Amendment retaliatory discharge claim, the plaintiff must prove that (1) he suffered an adverse employment 3 Markos also claimed that the defendants’ actions violated his due process rights in his employment as a police officer. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants, ruling that Markos had not alleged or presented evidence of either a liberty or property interest in his employment as a police officer. Markos has not appealed that ruling. 4 action, (2) his speech involved a matter of public concern, (3) his interest in commenting on the matter of public concern outweighed the defendant’s interest in promoting efficiency, and (4) his speech was a substantial or motivating factor behind the defendant’s actions. Harris v. Victoria Independent School District, 168 F.3d 216, 220 (5th Cir. 1999). As the parties agree, because the district court granted summary judgment against Markos’ retaliatory discharge claim on the second element, this appeal focuses only on whether Markos’ speech involved a matter of public concern.