Waters v. Churchill

With Justice Blackmun joining in dissent, Justice Stevens wrote that the hospital should not be able to take disciplinary action based on what they thought was said. Blackmun wrote that public "agencies are often the site of sharp differences . . . When those who work together disagree, reports of speech are often skewed." Blackmun believed the majority opinion inappropriately favored "discipline, rather than further discussion, when such disputes arise." He believed the court of appeals requiring a trial to determine what was actually spoken should be pursued if the hospital could not resolve the issue without disciplinary action. Otherwise, public employees may not be able to "express their views on issues of public concern without fear of discipline or termination." Misconceptions by the employer should not be sufficient cause for violating an employee's First Amendment rights.