The Rutan v. Republican Party of Illinois case in 1989 was a landmark decision by the US Supreme Court that extended the prohibition on political patronage to include promotions, transfers, recalls and hiring public employees. The plaintiffs were five public employees from Illinois who alleged they had been overlooked for promotion because they lacked connections with or support for the Republican party. They argued this violated their First Amendment rights to freedom of speech and association. The court ruled in favor of Rutan et al., stating that unless it could be proven that party affiliation was an appropriate requirement for a job role, such practices constituted "an impermissible infringement on First Amendment rights." This ruling significantly expanded protections against politically motivated employment decisions within government jobs.

In the dissenting opinion for Rutan v. Republican Party of Illinois, Justice Scalia argued that patronage hiring practices do not infrally upon First Amendment rights and are a long-standing part of American political tradition. He contended that these practices serve to ensure loyalty among public employees and promote effective government functioning. Furthermore, he expressed concern over the Court's decision potentially leading to an increase in litigation as disgruntled job applicants could claim they were denied employment due to their political affiliations or beliefs. Additionally, he criticized the majority for failing to provide clear guidance on what constitutes impermissible consideration of politics in public sector hiring decisions.