In a landmark decision, the U.S. Supreme Court has outlined the circumstances under which public officials can be sued for blocking individuals on social media platforms.
The ruling makes clear that someone can sue public officials for blocking or muting them on social media, as it counts as a state action.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote the unanimous decision, noting the difficulty in separating official from private speech online. The court ruled that an official’s speech may be a state action if they have and seem to use state authority.
The ruling stemmed from cases of a California school board member and a Michigan city manager who blocked social media users. The Supreme Court sent these cases back to lower courts to apply the new legal test.
During deliberations, the court often referenced former President Trump’s controversial Twitter use. Critics sued Trump for blocking them, and courts ruled against him for using Twitter for official announcements. After his term ended and Twitter disabled his account, the court dismissed the case.
The decision impacts all public officials using social media. It states that blocking users could lead to First Amendment lawsuits.
The ruling aligns with the Supreme Court’s focus on social media’s role in free speech and governance.
This decision is key in setting the digital duties and limits for public officials.