![]() ![]() * The clauses declared unconstitutional by the court below required the employee to swear: (a) "that I am not a member of the Communist Party" (b) "that I have not and will not lend my aid, support, advice, counsel or influence to the Communist Party" and (c) That portion of the oath, therefore, cannot stand. The second portion of the oath, approved by the District Court, falls within the ambit of decisions of this Court proscribing summary dismissal from public employment without hearing or inquiry required by due process. The validity of this section of the oath would appear settled. The first section of the oath upheld by the District Court, requiring all applicants to pledge to support the Constitution of the United States and of the State of Florida, demands no more of Florida public employees than is required of all state and federal officers. Appellant was dismissed from her teaching position on March 18, 1969, for refusing to sign the loyalty oath required of all Florida public employees, Fla.Stat. She was interviewed by the principal of Callahan Elementary School, and, on January 27, 1969, appellant was employed as a substitute classroom teacher in the fourth grade of that school. On January 16, 1969, appellant made application for a teaching position with the Orange County school system. The appeal is from that portion of the District Court decision which upheld the remaining two clauses in the oath: I do hereby solemnly swear or affirm (1) "that I will support the Constitution of the United States and of the State of Florida" and (2) "that I do not believe in the overthrow of the Government of the United States or of the State of Florida by force or violence." 208Įmployment on the taking of an oath including the language declared unconstitutional. District Court declared three of the five clauses contained in the oaths to be unconstitutional, * and enjoined the State from conditioning U. ![]() (1965), and the various loyalty oaths upon which appellant's employment as a school teacher was conditioned. ![]() This is an appeal from an action commenced in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida challenging the constitutionality of §§ 876.05-876.10 of Fla.Stat. The portion of the oath requiring him to swear that he does not believe in the violent overthrow of the Federal or State Government is invalid as providing for his dismissal without hearing or inquiry required by due process. 207 APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Syllabusįlorida's statutory loyalty oath provision requiring a Florida public employee as an employment condition to swear that he will support the Federal and State Constitutions is constitutionally valid. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |