Opinion ID: 202046
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Political Discrimination and Plaintiff Hernández

Text: 69 [T]he fact that a transitory employee does not have a reasonable expectation of renewal in his or her employment. . . does not defeat a First Amendment claim. Gomez v. Rivera Rodriguez, 344 F.3d 103, 111 n. 5 (1st Cir.2003) (internal quotation marks omitted) (omission in original) (quoting Nieves-Villanueva v. Soto-Rivera, 133 F.3d 92, 98 (1st Cir. 1997)). 70 Our recitation of the evidence quickly disposes of the Mayor's arguments that Hernández failed to demonstrate that Mayor Román knew her, knew her political affiliation or used that information as a factor in not renewing her transitory contract. Mayor Román argues that the evidence established a non-discriminatory reason for the termination of Hernández — that the department lacked funds for her position. But there was testimony this was not true, and her PDP replacement was hired only five months later. And the Mayor's argument that Hernández was not qualified for her Social Worker position could easily have been understood by the jury to be a pretext. She had been continually rehired and had received excellent ratings. 71 Mayor Román's final argument on this issue is that Hernández failed to timely reapply after receiving her dismissal letter. The evidence on this point actually works to Mayor Román's disadvantage: Hernández testified that the Municipality was supposed to summon her to compete for her old job before it was again filled, and that it did not do so.