Court Opinion

ID: 9481012
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 08:05:25.366646+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:48:02.904694
License: Public Domain

TORRUELLA, Circuit Judge
(Dissenting).
In my opinion the record is clear that appellants’ actions against appellee were taken for “the purpose and effect of forcing the transferred employee to quit the employment.” Alicea Rosado v. Garcia-Santiago, 562 F.2d 114, 119 (1st Cir.1977). This circuit’s holding in Alicea Rosado, which preceded the Supreme Court’s decision in Rutan v. Republican Party of Illinois, — U.S. -, 110 S.Ct. 2729, 111 L.Ed.2d 52 (1990), by thirteen years, must have clearly signaled to appellants, even in 1985, that their retaliatory actions against appellee because of her political beliefs violated the Constitution of the United States. We should not be too eager to accommodate appellants’ disingenuousness in seeking to avoid liability by claiming qualified immunity particularly when we consider the added factor that, if true, appellants’ actions would have also constituted clear violations of Commonwealth law. Clemente v. Dpto. de la Vivienda, 114 D.P.R. 763 (1983); P.R. Const. art. II, § 1; P.R. *1032Laws Ann. tit. 3, § 1301 et seq.; P.R.Laws Ann. tit. 29, § 146; P.R.Laws Ann. tit. 1, § 13.
I dissent.