They forgot oneELB wrote:Actually, if you go read the case through,"it depends" is the current answer, at least in Utah.
The Volokh link (which was screwed up earlier, now fixed) explains some of this. Employers can draft rules, but they cannot fire for them if they contravene certain public policies. A crystal clear example is that an employer cannot legally fire or retaliate against an employee who refuses to perform an illegal act, or who reports illegal activity by the employer or coworkers.
Moving down the scale a bit, employers cannot retaliate for exercising certain rights and privileges, like filing for workers compensation. In some states at least, you cannot be fired for political activity or statements outside of employment. In some states, you cannot be fired for having a firearm locked in your car in the parking lot.
So the question going to the Utah Supreme Court is "can employers fire (which implies they can forbid) employees who otherwise legally defend themselves?"
If confronted by deadly force on the job, should it be legal for an employer to fire you for defending yourself? Or, if you want to keep your job, do you have to submit to deadly force and hope you live through it to keep that job? If's not like you can wait until you are off the job to decide whether to defend yourself or not.
Walmart seems to be trying to avoid this particular question by arguing that (in the first event that I described above), the shoplifter never threatened anyone and the employees prevented him from leaving (in violation of policy). The employees testified that they never impeded the shoplifter's ability to leave until he shoved a gun in one of the employee's ribs and they tackled him. (I think the guy in the third event loses however the USC decides).
There is, however, a third constraint, created by judges in many states: the tort of “wrongful termination in violation of public policy.” The Utah formulation of this tort, which is similar to that in many other states, bars employer retaliation against an employee for:
(i)[r]efusing to commit an illegal or wrongful act, such as refusing to violate the antitrust laws;
(ii) performing a public obligation, such as accepting jury duty;
(iii) exercising a legal right or privilege, such as filing a workers’ compensation claim; or
(iv) reporting to a public authority criminal activity of the employer.
(V) Refusing to Work Because Conditions are Dangerous
https://www.osha.gov/as/opa/worker/refuse.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I don’t know if/how this would play into the situation.