RUTAN v. REPUBLICAN PARTY OF ILLINOIS

Legal Principle at Issue

Whether the First Amendment prohibition against political patronage dismissals for public employees (established in Elrod v. Burns and Branti v. Finkel) extends to other non-civil-service public employment decisions — specifically hiring, promotions, transfers, and recalls.

Action

Affirmed and reversed (or vacated) in part and remanded. Petitioning party received a favorable disposition.

Facts/Syllabus

The Illinois Governor issued an executive order instituting a hiring freeze, whereby state officials are prohibited from hiring any employee, filling any vacancy, creating any new position, or taking any similar action without the governor's "express permission." 

Petitioners and cross-respondents — an applicant for employment, employees who had been denied promotions or transfers, and former employees who had not been recalled after layoffs — brought suit in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of Illinois, alleging that, by means of the freeze, the governor was operating a political patronage system; that they had suffered discrimination in state employment because they had not been Republican Party supporters; and that this discrimination violates the First Amendment. The district court dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. 

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part. Noting that Elrod v. Burns (1976) and Branti v. Finkel (1980) had found that the patronage practice of discharging public employees on the basis of their political affiliation violates the First Amendment, the Seventh Circuit held that other patronage practices violate the Amendment only when they are the "substantial equivalent of a dismissal," — i.e., when they would lead reasonable persons to resign. The Seventh Circuit concluded, based on Wygant v. Jackson Board of Education (1986), that rejecting an employment application did not impose a hardship comparable to the loss of a job. Thus, the appeals court dismissed the hiring claim, but remanded the others for further proceedings.