T110's Northern Migration

The_Chieftain:   It was Cooper Tyres and Rubber vs NLRB. Unionization had nothing to do with the opinion, it was more a matter of specificity as to the nature of the offense. Basically, a time, place and manner judgement. I'm not sure it's a direct analogy either, but it does imply that at least some protections are afforded an employee even if he is being racist and detrimental to the company's position.   The argument in favor of employment protection for white supremacists (or LGBT or whatever activists that the employer disagrees with) in general is based on protections of civil liberties: It's not the direct gender/race/orientation type protection, but instead an indirect one given an employer's level of control over an employee. A firing for a political activity, after all, does not only affect the employee in question, it will also have the effect of stifling the political activities of other employees who may decide that keeping their pay cheque is worth sacrificing the risk of being politically active in their own time for whatever other cause that they don't know the boss will or will not approve of. And being involved in politics is a pretty fundamental civil liberty. As a result, a firing could, in theory, result in both a civil suit and federal criminal suit.   Again, the lawyers are not convinced that such an argument will work, but neither do they say that it won't either as there is reasonable soundness to the argument. The only way to find out is to for someone to try.