Steven Melton, a firefighter for the City of Forrest City, Arkansas, reposted a black-and-white image on his personal Facebook page in June 2020. This was after protests regarding the murder of George Floyd by a Minneapolis police officer began. The image depicted a silhouette of a baby in the womb with a rope around its neck, accompanied by the caption “I can’t breathe!” Melton intended the post to express his anti-abortion views.
A retired fire-department supervisor complained, and Melton promptly deleted the post. However, Mayor Cedric Williams placed him on administrative leave and, after a one-day investigation, fired him, citing the post’s “egregious nature” and the “huge firestorm” it provoked. Williams noted that police officers, city council members, and citizens had flooded phone lines with complaints, some demanding Melton be barred from responding to emergency calls. Melton, who had four and a half years of unblemished service, sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging First Amendment retaliation.
The district court granted summary judgment to the City and Williams, ruling that Melton’s speech was unprotected under the Pickering balancing test, which weighs a public employee’s free speech rights against the government’s interest in workplace efficiency. The court deferred to Williams’ claim that the post disrupted public services, even though no firefighter refused to work with Melton, and no operational disruptions occurred.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit reversed. It held that Melton spoke “as a citizen on a matter of public concern” — abortion — which triggered First Amendment protection. The Court rejected the City’s argument that the “firestorm” alone justified termination, calling the evidence of disruption “thin” and warning against constitutionalizing a “heckler’s veto.” Williams’ prediction that the post would erode trust in firefighters was “vague and conclusory,” and his rushed investigation suggested the real motive was disagreement with Melton’s viewpoint.
“Enough outsider complaints could prevent government employees from speaking on any controversial subject, even on their own personal time,” the Court noted, emphasizing that the City must show actual or likely disruption to its operations, not just public outrage. Here, “there was no showing that Melton’s post had an impact on the fire department itself. No current firefighter complained or confronted him about it. Nor did any co-worker or supervisor refuse to work with him.”
Melton v. City of Forrest City, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 20503 *.