Whether Respondents violated Mr. Hunt's clearly established rights as a private citizen under the First Amendment by punishing him for his off-campus, political speech

QUESTION PRESENTED In 2012, Petitioner Paul Hunt was a student at the University of New Mexico School of Medicine. Mr. Hunt posted comments on his personal Facebook page concerning abortion and the recent presidential election. He did not identify himself as being affiliated with the University, did not reference the Medical School, and did not direct his comments to faculty, classmates, or any other individual. Yet Mr. Hunt was punished for violating the University’s Respectful Campus Policy and Social Media Policy because his political speech was deemed “unprofessional.” Mr. Hunt filed suit claiming, as relevant, that punishing him for engaging in political speech as a private citizen violated the First Amendment. The district court held that Respondents were entitled to qualified immunity and granted summary judgment. The Tenth Circuit affirmed. In the view of the court of appeals, there was no clearly established law that notified “reasonable medical school administrators that sanctioning a student’s off-campus, online speech for the purpose of instilling professional norms is unconstitutional.” The question presented is: Whether Respondents violated Mr. Hunt’s clearly established rights as a private citizen under the First Amendment by punishing him for his offcampus, political speech.