October Term 2013 · Docket 13-483

Does a public employee's compelled testimony count as job duties?

A fired employee claims retaliation for grand jury testimony. His employer argues the speech falls within his job duties.

Official caption
Lane v. Franks
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    Lane's attorney stated the firing followed grand jury testimony.

    Franks' attorney cited the government's interest in managing staff.

    questions_and_answers

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

The case tests whether compelled testimony counts as job duties. This status affects First Amendment protection for public employees.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on April 28, 2014.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

Lane wants a ruling that his testimony was protected speech.

Franks wants a ruling that the testimony was part of his job.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

Lane argues compelled testimony is not a job duty.

Franks argues the government manages employees during their work.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Sotomayor asked if bad circuit precedent excuses the employee.

Justice Alito asked when subpoenaed testimony leaves job scope.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

The outcome defines the boundary between job duties and protected speech. This boundary shapes retaliation claims for public employees.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON