In the case of Board of County Commissioners v. Umbehr, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1996 that independent contractors have First Amendment protection from termination due to their political speech or affiliation. The plaintiff, Keen A. Umbehr, was a trash hauler whose contract with Wabaunsee County in Kansas was terminated after he criticized county officials publicly and ran for office as an opponent to some board members. He sued on grounds that his First Amendment rights had been violated by this retaliatory action against his freedom of speech. The court held in a 7-2 decision that terminating government contracts as punishment for public criticism constituted unconstitutional retaliation under the First Amendment; it extended constitutional protections typically afforded to public employees to include independent contractors like Umbehr who were performing similar roles. This ruling clarified and expanded upon previous decisions regarding free speech rights within employment relationships involving governmental entities - asserting not only employees but also those engaged through contractual arrangements are protected from punitive actions related directly to their exercise of constitutionally guaranteed freedoms.

In the dissenting opinion for BD. OF COUNTY COMM'RS v. UMBEHR, Justice Scalia argued that the First Amendment does not protect independent contractors from termination due to their political beliefs or affiliations. He contended that extending such protections would be a significant departure from traditional constitutional interpretation and could lead to an unmanageable flood of litigation as courts attempt to determine whether a contractor's speech was indeed the cause of termination. Furthermore, he suggested this protection might hinder government efficiency by making it difficult for public officials to terminate contracts with individuals whose views they find objectionable or disruptive. Thus, according to Justice Scalia’s perspective, while free speech is important in our society, it should not interfere with governmental operations and decisions regarding contract terminations.