Colorado Jury Instruction — 1.1.1 Public Employee First Amendment Claim Discharge — Failure To Promote Free Speech On Matter Of Public Concern In Colorado, there is a specific jury instruction known as 1.1.1 that addresses a public employee's First Amendment claim of wrongful discharge due to a failure to promote free speech on a matter of public concern. This instruction helps guide the jury in understanding the legal principles involved in such cases and provides a framework for evaluating the evidence presented during the trial. When a public employee asserts a First Amendment claim, they are essentially asserting that their rights to free speech have been violated by their employer. However, the First Amendment protection in the context of public employment is not absolute. The government, as an employer, has the right to regulate the speech of its employees if it has a legitimate interest in doing so. Colorado Jury Instruction — 1.1.1 addresses the specific situation where a public employee claims that they were discharged (fired) from their job due to their failure to promote free speech on a matter of public concern. This instruction is applicable when the employee's speech involves matters that are of legitimate public interest and not merely personal grievances or matters of private concern. The instruction essentially informs the jury that, in order to find in favor of the plaintiff (the discharged employee), they must consider several factors. These factors may include: 1. Determining whether the employee's speech touched upon a matter of public concern. This could involve issues related to government policies, political matters, corruption, or any topic that is relevant to the public. 2. Evaluating whether the employee's speech was made in their official capacity or as a private citizen. Speech made within the employee's official duties may be subject to greater restrictions, whereas speech made as a private citizen may receive higher levels of protection. 3. Assessing whether the employee's speech caused or threatened to cause significant disruption to the employer's operations or if it interfered with the performance of their duties. 4. Weighing the employer's interest in promoting efficient and effective public services against the employee's interest in engaging in protected speech. If the jury finds that the employee's speech was indeed a matter of public concern, made as a private citizen, and did not significantly disrupt the employer's operations, they may conclude that the employer's decision to discharge the employee was unconstitutional. It's important to note that this jury instruction is specific to the State of Colorado and may vary in other jurisdictions. This instruction serves as a guideline for jurors and helps them consider the legal aspects of a public employee's First Amendment claim.