September 15, 2025 • 10 mins
Plenty of people have been losing their jobs over comments made on social media, appearing to celebrate the assassination of Charlie Kirk. Others have questioned whether those firings violate employees' First Amendment rights. Susan Norton with the Florida employment law firm of Allen, Norton & Blue shares the facts about Free Speech.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Hey, Joel Malcolm for wj NOO dot com, the Florida
News Network. So we had an office depot worker fired
for refusing to print a flyer for Charlie Kirk vigil
in Michigan. That's been one story that happened over the weekend.
But the bigger one has been a lot of reports
of people getting let go of their jobs after writing
social media posts, many making light of or celebrating the
(00:23):
assassination of Charlie Kirk, the founder of Turning Point USA.
Some of these have been doctors like the um neurologists
placed on leave, a tenured FAU professor of Florida Atlantic
University on paid leave. A teacher in Martin County who's
also president of the county's teachers' union removed from the
classroom after his comments online, and that school district saying
(00:45):
he has due process, so they're looking into what happens there.
Many people in the private sector just completely let go
of their job, and this is all because of what they're.
Speaker 2 (00:55):
Doing on social media.
Speaker 1 (00:59):
They're voicing a very strong opinion, and we wanted to
go to the expert and find out about not specifically
this case, but in general.
Speaker 2 (01:08):
When you make.
Speaker 1 (01:08):
These types of comments that your employer may not like.
Is it you know, are you still enjoying the First
Amendment if they let you go. Susan Norton is an
employment attorney and partner with the Office of Alan Norton
and Blue. Thank you for joining me.
Speaker 3 (01:26):
Absolutely pleasure to be here.
Speaker 1 (01:29):
So, you know, one of the things that I've been
kind of putting it this way to people that are like,
what about the First Amendment? And I've been saying, well,
you have your First Amendment the way I understand it. Now,
you're the expert, and that's why we wanted to have
you on. You have the First Amendment. That means you're
not going to get arrested or charged like in other
countries you could because you voice an opinion, regardless of
(01:52):
what it is and who agrees or disagrees with it,
how born it might be. Whatever that being said, there
may be consequence it is for making that opinion. Is
that correct or incorrect?
Speaker 3 (02:06):
That's absolutely correct, particularly in the private sector, because in
the private sector you do not have a First Amendment
right to say anything. The First Amendment is only as
the government.
Speaker 2 (02:20):
So explain that.
Speaker 1 (02:21):
Getting get into that a little bit more for me,
and this you know, and this would this would include
There are a lot of videos of people that are
crying because they got let go. They were shocked because
they got let go because their employer in the private sector,
some private business somewhere, maybe it's a store or restaurant
or whatnot, and they got let go because they made
(02:42):
some comments on social media.
Speaker 2 (02:45):
Explain the difference.
Speaker 3 (02:48):
Sure, the First Amendment prohibits the government from taking action
against the citizen or an individual because of something they say. Necessarily,
the First Amendment does not apply to the relationship in
the private sector between an employer and the employee. The
(03:10):
First Amendment only prohibits certain government action.
Speaker 1 (03:15):
Okay, So would a public school teacher or a professor
at a public university count as government or no, Yes
they would.
Speaker 3 (03:26):
They're employed by the public sector, and the First Amendment
is not limitless. It depends upon what is said and
the impact of it. But generally, yes, it would apply
to anyone employed by the public sector.
Speaker 1 (03:45):
So, without speaking specifically to this situation, might that explain
why a professor or a public school teacher, instead of
just being let go willy nilly, would be you know,
on paid leave while things are investigated.
Speaker 3 (04:03):
That would be my assumption.
Speaker 1 (04:04):
Yes, But but as you said, it's not limited. So
even even somebody who's in the public sector, they just
can't do whatever they want in the public eye, and
you know, it gets looked the other way.
Speaker 3 (04:19):
That's correct. That you know, that is a line, uh
that you know gets continuously gray. So it's difficult to
say where it stops. Certainly the old adage about you
can't cry fire in a crowded theater. It's not protected
by the First Amendment, and you could be criminally liable.
Speaker 2 (04:41):
Correct.
Speaker 1 (04:41):
Okay, so let's talk about the private sector. Let's just
let's just look at you know, Joe and Joe works
at Joseph Barista. Joe says a comment online is boss
is you know the company doesn't like Do employees have
a rite of privacy when it comes to their online
social media stuff?
Speaker 3 (05:04):
Is it their personal online social media stuff? Yes, but
they're public, they're putting it out in the public.
Speaker 2 (05:11):
So they put something on their own so it's not
a right to privacy.
Speaker 1 (05:15):
So they put something on their own Instagram X Facebook page,
it's their own, it's got nothing to do with the company.
But that's still the employer has has a right to
you know, if they have access to that or if
it's shown to them, go, this looks this makes our
coffee company look bad, for example, Yes, or.
Speaker 3 (05:32):
If it's totally against public sentiment, and so long as
it is not criticizing the employer or one of the
supervisors are taking you know, shot at the operations of
the employer, because then you get into issues that are
protected potentially or so as long as it's not complaining
(05:53):
about discrimination or harassment along that line, because then that
can be protected. But if it's us generally a comment
on public events and it's offensive to many people perhaps
or to the employer, then there's no basis for it
to be protected.
Speaker 1 (06:12):
And might they, I mean, might the employer do that
because it looks it makes the company because there are
I mean, are you always representing your company? You're from
a law firm or you know, anytime you're speaking publicly,
are you always you're always representing your law firm? Correct? Uh?
Speaker 3 (06:30):
Yeah, people would say that.
Speaker 2 (06:34):
Well, you're doing a good job of it. I leould
tell you that, thank you?
Speaker 1 (06:38):
Do you would you as a again? You are Susan
Norton again, South Florida a statewide really, you guys serve
the entire state employment attorney. Is it something that you
would recommend to a company or to an employer that
they should warn all of their employees about posting contrab
(07:00):
marcial remarks on social media? Is something that you think
should be beneficial, especially in today's day. I mean, it's
a different world than it was twenty years ago.
Speaker 3 (07:09):
Definitely, And yes, we do recommend social media policies, you
know that be very specific.
Speaker 1 (07:17):
What are some of the things that you would you know,
you don't have to get into all of them, but
kind of the things that you would recommend that they.
Speaker 2 (07:24):
Have their employees sign off on not well.
Speaker 3 (07:30):
Number one, any system that they have internally that the
employer has internally, employees should be told that there's no
expectation of privacy. If they utilize, for example, the corporate
emails or telephone systems, you know, any of those types
of systems, there's no expectation of privacy and any thing
(07:51):
can be accessed by the employer. So if they're posting
by using email accounts, that's dangerous for the employee. Secondly,
they are to be told that anything that is embarrassing
or results in public outrage to the employer, then the
(08:12):
employee can be liable for it on social media.
Speaker 2 (08:17):
So the emails, that's another thing.
Speaker 1 (08:19):
And I didn't even think of that because we you know,
here at iHeart, we know that the company has the
right to peek into our emails, right to just see,
you know, if there's a reason, I would assume, if
there's a reason, I would assume they're not just looking,
you know, every day, what's Joel doing in his email today?
But if there was some sort of a reason that
(08:39):
they were suspicious about something that they could do that.
Do you tell employers that that should be a responsibility
that they monitor emails?
Speaker 3 (08:51):
Not so necessary monitor, although some companies do. They look
for particularly offensive line language, curse words, you know, obscenities,
and those tend to get spotted some companies. But in
terms of telling employees that they have no expectation of
privacy in their emails and they may be monitored, yes, absolutely.
Speaker 1 (09:17):
Okay, let's wrap this up. Anything else that you can
think of, as far as advice that you would give
to either employer or you know, an employee or somebody
working even in the public sector that you know may
feel like they have a very strong opinion that they'd
like to put out there.
Speaker 3 (09:34):
As long as it's not derogatory of the employer or
the operations that becomes protected or can become protected activity
under various laws, or harassment or discrimination, then I would
just be careful about what is said.
Speaker 1 (09:52):
And what are they looking at. They're mainly looking for,
you know, they don't want people talking about violence and
things like that, right, I mean, those.
Speaker 3 (09:59):
Are threats absolutely, violence of threats.
Speaker 1 (10:03):
Yes, okay, all right, well, I appreciate you taking the time.
Obviously very big subject right now. Susan Norton, employment attorney
with the Office of Alan Norton and Blue here on
the Florida News Network.
Speaker 2 (10:16):
Thanks again, thank you,
Hey, Joel Malcolm for wj NOO dot com, the Florida
News Network. So we had an office depot worker fired
for refusing to print a flyer for Charlie Kirk vigil
in Michigan. That's been one story that happened over the weekend.
But the bigger one has been a lot of reports
of people getting let go of their jobs after writing
social media posts, many making light of or celebrating the
(00:23):
assassination of Charlie Kirk, the founder of Turning Point USA.
Some of these have been doctors like the um neurologists
placed on leave, a tenured FAU professor of Florida Atlantic
University on paid leave. A teacher in Martin County who's
also president of the county's teachers' union removed from the
classroom after his comments online, and that school district saying
(00:45):
he has due process, so they're looking into what happens there.
Many people in the private sector just completely let go
of their job, and this is all because of what they're.
Speaker 2 (00:55):
Doing on social media.
Speaker 1 (00:59):
They're voicing a very strong opinion, and we wanted to
go to the expert and find out about not specifically
this case, but in general.
Speaker 2 (01:08):
When you make.
Speaker 1 (01:08):
These types of comments that your employer may not like.
Is it you know, are you still enjoying the First
Amendment if they let you go. Susan Norton is an
employment attorney and partner with the Office of Alan Norton
and Blue. Thank you for joining me.
Speaker 3 (01:26):
Absolutely pleasure to be here.
Speaker 1 (01:29):
So, you know, one of the things that I've been
kind of putting it this way to people that are like,
what about the First Amendment? And I've been saying, well,
you have your First Amendment the way I understand it. Now,
you're the expert, and that's why we wanted to have
you on. You have the First Amendment. That means you're
not going to get arrested or charged like in other
countries you could because you voice an opinion, regardless of
(01:52):
what it is and who agrees or disagrees with it,
how born it might be. Whatever that being said, there
may be consequence it is for making that opinion. Is
that correct or incorrect?
Speaker 3 (02:06):
That's absolutely correct, particularly in the private sector, because in
the private sector you do not have a First Amendment
right to say anything. The First Amendment is only as
the government.
Speaker 2 (02:20):
So explain that.
Speaker 1 (02:21):
Getting get into that a little bit more for me,
and this you know, and this would this would include
There are a lot of videos of people that are
crying because they got let go. They were shocked because
they got let go because their employer in the private sector,
some private business somewhere, maybe it's a store or restaurant
or whatnot, and they got let go because they made
(02:42):
some comments on social media.
Speaker 2 (02:45):
Explain the difference.
Speaker 3 (02:48):
Sure, the First Amendment prohibits the government from taking action
against the citizen or an individual because of something they say. Necessarily,
the First Amendment does not apply to the relationship in
the private sector between an employer and the employee. The
(03:10):
First Amendment only prohibits certain government action.
Speaker 1 (03:15):
Okay, So would a public school teacher or a professor
at a public university count as government or no, Yes
they would.
Speaker 3 (03:26):
They're employed by the public sector, and the First Amendment
is not limitless. It depends upon what is said and
the impact of it. But generally, yes, it would apply
to anyone employed by the public sector.
Speaker 1 (03:45):
So, without speaking specifically to this situation, might that explain
why a professor or a public school teacher, instead of
just being let go willy nilly, would be you know,
on paid leave while things are investigated.
Speaker 3 (04:03):
That would be my assumption.
Speaker 1 (04:04):
Yes, But but as you said, it's not limited. So
even even somebody who's in the public sector, they just
can't do whatever they want in the public eye, and
you know, it gets looked the other way.
Speaker 3 (04:19):
That's correct. That you know, that is a line, uh
that you know gets continuously gray. So it's difficult to
say where it stops. Certainly the old adage about you
can't cry fire in a crowded theater. It's not protected
by the First Amendment, and you could be criminally liable.
Speaker 2 (04:41):
Correct.
Speaker 1 (04:41):
Okay, so let's talk about the private sector. Let's just
let's just look at you know, Joe and Joe works
at Joseph Barista. Joe says a comment online is boss
is you know the company doesn't like Do employees have
a rite of privacy when it comes to their online
social media stuff?
Speaker 3 (05:04):
Is it their personal online social media stuff? Yes, but
they're public, they're putting it out in the public.
Speaker 2 (05:11):
So they put something on their own so it's not
a right to privacy.
Speaker 1 (05:15):
So they put something on their own Instagram X Facebook page,
it's their own, it's got nothing to do with the company.
But that's still the employer has has a right to
you know, if they have access to that or if
it's shown to them, go, this looks this makes our
coffee company look bad, for example, Yes, or.
Speaker 3 (05:32):
If it's totally against public sentiment, and so long as
it is not criticizing the employer or one of the
supervisors are taking you know, shot at the operations of
the employer, because then you get into issues that are
protected potentially or so as long as it's not complaining
(05:53):
about discrimination or harassment along that line, because then that
can be protected. But if it's us generally a comment
on public events and it's offensive to many people perhaps
or to the employer, then there's no basis for it
to be protected.
Speaker 1 (06:12):
And might they, I mean, might the employer do that
because it looks it makes the company because there are
I mean, are you always representing your company? You're from
a law firm or you know, anytime you're speaking publicly,
are you always you're always representing your law firm? Correct? Uh?
Speaker 3 (06:30):
Yeah, people would say that.
Speaker 2 (06:34):
Well, you're doing a good job of it. I leould
tell you that, thank you?
Speaker 1 (06:38):
Do you would you as a again? You are Susan
Norton again, South Florida a statewide really, you guys serve
the entire state employment attorney. Is it something that you
would recommend to a company or to an employer that
they should warn all of their employees about posting contrab
(07:00):
marcial remarks on social media? Is something that you think
should be beneficial, especially in today's day. I mean, it's
a different world than it was twenty years ago.
Speaker 3 (07:09):
Definitely, And yes, we do recommend social media policies, you
know that be very specific.
Speaker 1 (07:17):
What are some of the things that you would you know,
you don't have to get into all of them, but
kind of the things that you would recommend that they.
Speaker 2 (07:24):
Have their employees sign off on not well.
Speaker 3 (07:30):
Number one, any system that they have internally that the
employer has internally, employees should be told that there's no
expectation of privacy. If they utilize, for example, the corporate
emails or telephone systems, you know, any of those types
of systems, there's no expectation of privacy and any thing
(07:51):
can be accessed by the employer. So if they're posting
by using email accounts, that's dangerous for the employee. Secondly,
they are to be told that anything that is embarrassing
or results in public outrage to the employer, then the
(08:12):
employee can be liable for it on social media.
Speaker 2 (08:17):
So the emails, that's another thing.
Speaker 1 (08:19):
And I didn't even think of that because we you know,
here at iHeart, we know that the company has the
right to peek into our emails, right to just see,
you know, if there's a reason, I would assume, if
there's a reason, I would assume they're not just looking,
you know, every day, what's Joel doing in his email today?
But if there was some sort of a reason that
(08:39):
they were suspicious about something that they could do that.
Do you tell employers that that should be a responsibility
that they monitor emails?
Speaker 3 (08:51):
Not so necessary monitor, although some companies do. They look
for particularly offensive line language, curse words, you know, obscenities,
and those tend to get spotted some companies. But in
terms of telling employees that they have no expectation of
privacy in their emails and they may be monitored, yes, absolutely.
Speaker 1 (09:17):
Okay, let's wrap this up. Anything else that you can
think of, as far as advice that you would give
to either employer or you know, an employee or somebody
working even in the public sector that you know may
feel like they have a very strong opinion that they'd
like to put out there.
Speaker 3 (09:34):
As long as it's not derogatory of the employer or
the operations that becomes protected or can become protected activity
under various laws, or harassment or discrimination, then I would
just be careful about what is said.
Speaker 1 (09:52):
And what are they looking at. They're mainly looking for,
you know, they don't want people talking about violence and
things like that, right, I mean, those.
Speaker 3 (09:59):
Are threats absolutely, violence of threats.
Speaker 1 (10:03):
Yes, okay, all right, well, I appreciate you taking the time.
Obviously very big subject right now. Susan Norton, employment attorney
with the Office of Alan Norton and Blue here on
the Florida News Network.
Speaker 2 (10:16):
Thanks again, thank you,
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.