Whether a public employer's threats against an employee can suffice to establish a First Amendment retaliation claim, if those threats would dissuade a reasonable employee from speaking on a matter of public importance

University of Texas officials threatened Professor Richard Lowery with reduced pay, loss of a research post, and other consequences, if he did not stop publicly criticizing the UT administration. Wishing to avoid those outcomes, Lowery self-censored. In ten circuits, employer threats suffice to establish a § 1983 First Amendment retaliation claim if they would dissuade a reasonable employee from speaking. But the Fifth Circuit is one of two outlier courts that require a completed adverse action, such as a discharge, demotion, or reprimand, before an employee can state a retaliation claim—employer threats, no matter how credible or severe, are never enough. The question presented is whether a public employer’s threats against an employee can suffice to establish a First Amendment retaliation claim, if those threats would dissuade a reasonable employee from speaking on a matter of public importance.