case, Haverda wrote a letter to the editor, during a Sheriffs Election campaign, expressing support for the incumbent Sheriff Ratliff and criticizing his political opponent. Haverda received no compensation to pen the letter to the editor, and the letter was public and not an internal publication. Additionally, it was not part of Haverda’s job duties to speak to the media or write letters to the editor. Haverda was speaking as a citizen, supporting a candidate during an election, when he submitted his letter to the editor. Letters to the editor, supporting a candidate during a campaign, are a unique form of speech that embody the very essence of the First Amendment and require its full protection. See Pickering v. Bd. of Educ., 391 U.S. 563, 565, 88 S.Ct. 1731, 20 L.Ed.2d 811 (1968) (<HOLDING>); see also Garcetti 547 U.S. at 419, 126 S.Ct.
holding that a teachers first amendment rights were violated when the board of education dismissed him for sending a letter to newspaper criticizing a proposed tax increase holding that newspaper had sufficient interest to obtain curriculummapping reports from municipal board of education holding that the board of education violated a school teachers first amendment rights by dismissing him because he had criticized the board in a letter to the local newspaper holding that it is impermissible to dismiss a teacher for openly criticizing the board of education on its allocation of school funds between athletics and education and its methods of informing taxpayers about the need for additional revenue holding that a career teachers substantive due process rights were not violated when the school board decided not to renew her contract due to concerns about her performance