At Simple Justice, Scott Greenfield has a cogent examination of the "protest" of the NYPD in turning their backs on their mayor.
Here is the gist:
"Contrary to those who fail to grasp the nature of First Amendment rights, the cops’ protest was not a matter of free speech. When they express their view in uniform, they do so in their capacity as governmental officials. In their private capacity, they are entitled to free speech like anyone else. They are not entitled, however, to do so on duty, in uniform or using the authority of their position. They then speak as police officers, not private individuals.
And this is not only the law, but doctrinally critical. As private citizens, we are entitled to be wrong, self-serving and foolish in our views. When we speak on behalf of a government, we are not. A cop is not entitled to express his negative views on an identifiable group while in uniform, even though he has a right to hate anyone he wants as a private individual, and express those views otherwise.
When in uniform, they speak with the authority of their position; it’s not about them, but about the job. That’s the price they chose to pay when they decided to put on a shield. Don’t cry too much about it. The pension on the back end more than makes up for the infringement on their right to express their hate."
http://blog.simplejustice.us/...