In Rankin et al. v. McPherson, 1986, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Ardith McPherson who was fired from her clerical job at a Texas constable's office for making derogatory comments about President Ronald Reagan after his attempted assassination. The court held that her termination violated her First Amendment rights to free speech as she made the comment in a private conversation and it did not interfere with the efficiency of the public office where she worked. The ruling emphasized that even though government employees may have certain restrictions on their freedom of speech while performing official duties, they do not lose their constitutional protections when speaking on matters of public concern outside those duties.

In the dissenting opinion for Rankin et al. v. McPherson, Justice Powell argued that the majority's decision failed to adequately consider the context of McPherson's statement and its potential impact on office efficiency and discipline. He emphasized that her comment about hoping President Reagan would be assassinated was made in a public area of an office responsible for law enforcement, which could undermine respect for superiors and disrupt workplace harmony. Furthermore, he noted that such comments could potentially incite violence or create fear among colleagues who may perceive it as a threat rather than mere political hyperbole. Therefore, he believed that firing McPherson was justified due to these considerations related to maintaining order within this particular work environment.