1) If Pickering and its progeny are applicable to cases involving off-duty public employees who are speaking to matters of public interest which are not directly related to their employment, was the law "clearly established" from the appropriate courts of jurisdiction in this case so as to deny the Respondents qualified immunity?

2) If Pickering and its progeny are not applicable to cases involving off-duty public employees who are speaking to matters of public interest which are not directly related to their employment, what standard should the Court impose to strike a balance between the employee's constitutional rights and the government's interest in protecting its ability to efficiently carry out its functions?

Whether Pickering and its progeny apply to off-duty public employees speaking on matters of public interest unrelated to their employment, and the appropriate standard to balance the employee's constitutional rights and the government's interest in efficient operations