In a unanimous decision on Friday, the Supreme Court provided guidance on when public officials can face legal consequences for blocking critics on social media platforms.
The ruling, authored by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, addressed the tricky balance between the free speech rights of government officials and those of their constituents in an increasingly digital age.
The cases before the court involved school board members in Southern California and a city manager in Port Huron, Michigan who had blocked individuals from their social media accounts after receiving critical comments.
🚨BREAKING: The Supreme Court has just unanimously ruled that members of the public can sue public officials for blocking or muting them on social media.
What’s your thoughts on this? pic.twitter.com/knoF2QyAQh
— Ian Jaeger (@IanJaeger29) March 15, 2024
Barrett acknowledged the complexity, writing “When a government official posts about job-related topics on social media, it can be difficult to tell whether the speech is official or private.”
However, the court ultimately ruled that when officials use personal accounts to make official statements, they may not have carte blanche to censor dissent. “State officials have private lives and their own constitutional rights,” Barrett noted, but went on to explain that blocking critics or deleting comments could open them up to lawsuits if the posts are determined to essentially be government speech.
The justices laid out criteria for when an official’s social media activity crosses the line from personal to governmental. According to Barrett, posts must be made with the authority and intent to speak on behalf of the government. In such cases, criticism must be allowed.
This ruling follows in the footsteps of a similar case involving then-President Donald Trump blocking critics on Twitter, which the high court dismissed after he left office in 2021. With social media increasingly serving as a platform for elected leaders to communicate with the public, clarifying these boundaries is crucial.
NEW: The Supreme Court won't intervene to let a college student group host a drag show. No noted dissents. pic.twitter.com/VEMtRpXYmi
— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) March 15, 2024
Conservatives may view this decision as a win for free speech and a rebuke of censorship by government actors. The cases also highlight concerns on the right about big tech companies disproportionately silencing conservative viewpoints.
In addition to the cases decided Friday, the Supreme Court is set to hear Republican challenges to laws in Florida and Texas that prohibit social media platforms from removing posts based on the views expressed.
