Posted on 04/28/2023 10:57:51 AM PDT by Red Badger
One other thing; wouldn’t Fox’s summary firing of Tucker nullify all terms that he agreed to? In other words,what contract controls Hunter?
In those cases, the claims were based on civil rights laws (and the far left’s attempts to misconstrue them beyond all recognition). The defendants attempted to defend (some successfully, some not) based on their First Amendment rights, since it was a governmental action against them.
If I hire a spokesman and he publicly espouses woke or Nazi ideology in my company’s name or on my company’s time, I have every right to fire him. My employees do not have a First Amendment right while on my time and my firing them is not a governmental action. Imagine if employees could insult and cuss out customers at will, arguing that it is protected speech and, therefore, the First Amendment prohibits their employers from taking any action against them.
In the case of a governmental employee, the analysis is somewhat different. If a government employee is fired for protected speech, then it is a governmental action and the First Amendment does come into play.
Generally, if you fire an employee you do not continue to pay them. Apparently, Fox did not fire Tucker Carlson. He is still employed and paid by Fox, they just cancelled his show.
If they continue to pay him to sit home then it probably does not violate his contract, unless the contract guarantees Carlson a certain amount of airtime at specified times of day or Fox agreed to pay him some sort of royalties or commissions based on his show's earnings.
BINGO..................
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.