Table of Contents
King County, Wash. is this yearâs First Amendment Scrooge
UPDATED (DEC. 20, 2022): FIRE thanks our hundreds of supporters who emailed King County to urge it to abandon its unconstitutional office decoration policy. The policy singles out religious holiday decorations for suppression in virtual workspaces.
The countyâs reply to our supporters denies that the policy violates the First Amendment. They claim the policy is âcontent-neutralâ and is necessary to avoid the appearance that King County favors any particular religion.
Well, no.
The policy isnât even viewpoint-neutral â let alone content-neutral â because it bans only decorations expressing religious views. To enforce the policy, the county has to look at an employeeâs decorations and make a judgment about whether they express a religious viewpoint. The Supreme Court considers such viewpoint-based censorship an âegregious form of content discrimination.â
Whatâs more, no reasonable person would think the religious decor in an employeeâs personal workspace, real or virtual, is an endorsement of that religion by the county. Just as nobody would think the county roots for the Yankees because their logo is visible in an employeeâs home office during a Zoom meeting.
FIRE stands by its call for King County to bring its holiday decoration guidelines in line with the First Amendment.
If you work for King County in Washington, you better make sure you donât have a Christmas tree or menorah visible in the background during a work Zoom meeting. Or a , for that matter. Thatâs according to an internal memo from the countyâs human resources department that forbids employees from displaying religious symbols in their virtual workspaces.
King Countyâs selective targeting of religious views for suppression violates its employeesâ First Amendment right to free speech (and likely their right to free exercise of religion, as the First Liberty Institute recently ).
Talk radio host Jason Rantz a copy of the memo, titled âGuidelines for Holiday Decorations for King County Employees,â from a county staffer. The guidelines start by telling staff that the county âremains committed to honoring the diversity in its workforceâ and that as a public institution, it âcannot appear to support any particular religion.â
The memo goes on to say:
Some employees may not share your religion, practice any religion, or share your enthusiasm for holiday decorations. Displays of religious symbols may only be displayed in an employeeâs personal workspace. Religious symbols should not be displayed in or as a background to an employeeâs virtual workspace.
A personal workspace is defined as âan area occupied by a single employee that is not generally accessible to the public,â such as an individual office or cubicle. Non-religious holiday symbols like snowflakes, holly, and pumpkins are permitted (as long as you donât worship those objects, I guess).
King County should immediately revise its holiday decoration guidelines so they no longer single out employees based on the views their decorations express.
Hereâs our memo to King County: Government employees retain First Amendment rights, even while theyâre at work. And if there is one thing the First Amendment doesnât tolerate, itâs viewpoint-based censorship. The county canât tell its employees they can display decorations celebrating the holidays only if those decorations donât represent anything on the countyâs list of forbidden viewpoints, religious or not. The county might be treating all religious views the same, but itâs still singling out religious views vis-Ă -vis non-religious ones.
You canât ban Christmas trees while allowing .
A government employer has an interest in running an efficient operation. But concern that some employees might be offended by the sight of a Christmas tree or made uncomfortable by their colleagueâs dharma wheel pendant doesnât release the county from the strictures of the First Amendment. Symbols or images expressing political beliefs (such as a pride flag or a Gadsden flag) might cause friction between employees too, and itâs unclear if the county allows those. If it does, this would be more evidence that the county is simply discriminating against religious viewpoints.
The restrictions on employeesâ virtual workspaces also arenât justified by the countyâs concern about appearing to support religion â or the countyâs general authority to regulate employeesâ job-related speech. Earlier this year, the Supreme Court in upheld the right of a high school football coach to pray quietly on the 50-yard line after games on both free speech and free exercise grounds. The Court rejected the idea that everything public employees say in the workplace is âgovernment speech subject to government controlâ and explained the coach was not âseeking to convey a government-created message.â It also made clear that a public employeeâs private religious speech in the workplace does not automatically trigger an Establishment Clause violation.
Similarly, the virtual backgrounds that King County employees choose â and certainly whatever words or imagery are visible in their home workspaces when theyâre on a video call â are the employeeâs own speech, not the countyâs, and therefore retain robust First Amendment protection.
King County should immediately revise its holiday decoration guidelines so they no longer single out employees based on the views their decorations express.
Recent Articles
FIREâs award-winning Newsdesk covers the free speech news you need to stay informed.