Illinois Jury Instruction — 1.1.2 Public Employee First Amendment Claim Discharge — Failure To Promote Political Disloyalty — Key Employee The Illinois Jury Instruction — 1.1.2 addresses a specific claim made by public employees who believe they were discharged or not promoted due to their political disloyalty. This instruction is particularly relevant in cases where the employee holds a key position within the organization. In such claims, the burden of proof lies with the plaintiff, the public employee, who needs to demonstrate that their discharge or failure to be promoted was a direct result of their political disloyalty rather than any legitimate, non-political reasons. The jury is tasked with assessing the evidence presented and determining the outcome of the case. Key Employee refers to an employee who holds a position crucial to the organization's operations and decision-making process. Such employees are considered integral to the efficient functioning of the public entity they serve. Therefore, claims of discharge or failure to promote a key employee due to political disloyalty hold significant implications for both the individual and their employer. There may be variations or additional references to this jury instruction based on different circumstances or scenarios. However, the core elements consist of demonstrating a causal link between political disloyalty and the adverse employment action taken against the key employee. Key employees play a critical role in public organizations, making their political affiliation or loyalty a sensitive subject. Balancing First Amendment rights against an employer's need for efficient operations and impartiality can be a complex challenge for the courts and jury members. Overall, the Illinois Jury Instruction — 1.1.2 provides guidance to the jury in cases involving public employees claiming discharge or failure to promote based on their political disloyalty as a key employee. When deliberating, the jury must carefully consider the evidence presented and the impact such a claim may have on both the employee's individual rights and the organization's ability to function effectively.