bradley johnson. this case presents a unique set of facts that are not contested and fact matter at the end of the day. based on the facts the school district did create limited public forum for the non curricular personal speech of its features including mr. johnson. >> is that the analysis or should we begin with the supreme court's decision in pickering-garcetti connick and ask whether or not this was actually hired speech by a public employee who is directed by the school board to teach a particular subject matter? and is entitled to make policy as to what may or may not be taught in the classroom? >> when you look at the first amendment jurisprudence dealing with the use of a government facility and whether the limits can place on the use of the facility for the purpose they are designed for as opposed to their use of those facilities or property for expressive activity you conduct a formal analysis. >> even though the audience is captive? >> even though the audience is captive. it is a principal

bradley johnson. this case presents unique set of facts, the facts that are not contested in fact they're really mad at the end of the day. based on the facts the district did create a limited public forum for the non-curricular personal speech of its students. excuse become of his teachers including mr. johnson. >> is that the analysis? or should we begin first with the supreme court's decision in pickering-garcetti connick, and ask whether or not this was actually hired speech by a public employee who is directed by the school board to teach a particular subject matter? and is entitled to make policy as to what may or may not be taught in the classroom. >> i think, your honor, when you look at the first jurisprudence and with the government facilities and whether the limits of the government can place on the use of its facilities for the use of design for as opposed to the use of the facilities or property for expressive activity, you cannot perform analysis. >> even though the audience is captive?

free-speech rights were violated when the school board made san diego a high school math teacher bradley johnson takedown classroom banners which included such phrases as in god we trust and god bless america. several live events to tongue you about. officials from the justice department and federal trade commission testified on capitol hill about protecting privacy of smart phones and other mobile technology. witnesses will include representatives of google and apple. that is on c-span at 10:00 eastern. also at 10:00 eastern on c-span3 admiral robert papp talk about the coast guard budget request for the next year. he is before the senate appropriations subcommittee on homeland security. later on c-span3 at 3:30 p.m. eastern president obama will be in el paso. the texas talking about immigration, the economy and security. next a discussion of the state of the congressional research service. crs is a nonpartisan government agency that is part of the library of congress that provides policy and legal analysis to members of congress on a range of issues. panelists examined the expertise of the crs

bradley johnson. this case presents unique set of facts. the fact that is not contested and facts really matter at the end of the day. based on the fact, the school district did create a limited public forum for the noncurricular freedom of speech. >> is that the analysis or shouldn't we begin first with the supreme court's decision in pickering garset timbings, connick and ask whether or not this was actual leer hired speech by a public employee who is directed by the school board to teach a particular subject matter and is entitled to made policy as to what may or may not be taught in the classroom? >> well, i think when you look at the first amendment jurisbrewedens and looking at the use of a -- jurisprudence and looking at the use of a purpose designed for as opposed to the use of that property for expressive activity -- >> even though the audience is can'tive? >> even though the audience is captive. it's based on these facts. regarding -- >> that's not what we said in pelosa, is it, or in downs? >> downs is interesting. downs dealt wi