Quinn v. Muscare

Background

A Chicago Fire Department lieutenant was suspended for 29 days in 1974 for keeping a goatee that violated the department’s personal-appearance rules. He sued in federal court asking for an injunction and back pay, saying the rules interfered with his right to control his personal appearance. The department said the rules promoted safety (so gas masks would work) and discipline. The District Court found the rule justified on safety grounds and denied relief, but the Court of Appeals reversed on the ground that he was suspended without a prior opportunity to respond.

Reasoning

The central question was whether the suspension and the grooming rule were legally acceptable and whether a fired or suspended employee must get a chance to respond before discipline. After the case was argued, the Court decided a separate case upholding a similar police hair rule based on discipline and uniformity. That later decision made the District Court’s safety finding less important. The City’s Civil Service Commission also adopted a new rule giving pre-suspension hearings in nonemergency cases. Considering these developments, the Court dismissed its earlier grant of review as improvidently granted.

Real world impact

The dismissal leaves the firefighter’s suspension and the department’s grooming rule standing for now. Chicago civil service employees (except police under different rules) will be covered by the new pre-suspension hearing procedure. Because the Court dismissed the case rather than issuing a final ruling on the rule’s constitutionality, the legal fight over appearance rules may continue, and the Commission’s voluntary rule change could theoretically be changed later.