Supreme Court will decide if government officials can block social media critics
to tackle appeals from California and Michigan residents who claim officials violated First Amendment free speech rights by blocking them on social media in response to critical commentary.Poway Unified School District members Michelle O'Connor-Ratcliff and TJ Zane unfairly blocked them on Facebook and Twitter for writing hundreds of critical comments on talking points like school budgets and race.
The cases have had different outcomes so far. A federal judge sided with the Garniers in 2021, and an appeals court upheld the decision noting that O'Connor-Ratcliff and Zane both used their social accounts in an official role. However, the federal judge in the other case ruled for Freed in 2021, who won an appeal in 2022. Freed wasn't acting as City Manager when he blocked Lindke, the judges found.Rep.
both faced accusations they violated free speech rights by banning critics. To date, courts have typically ruled based on whether or not officials are using their accounts for business. Even a personal account used for official activity amounts to a public space where criticism must be allowed, a federal appeals court found when
. These issues haven't reached the Supreme Court until now. The legal body's decisions could settle the question and force officials to allow critics so long as the posts don't amount to harassment or threats.
Canada Latest News, Canada Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
U.S. Supreme Court to decide if public officials can block critics on social mediaThe U.S. Supreme Court, exploring free speech rights in the social media era, on Monday agreed to consider whether the Constitution's First Amendment bars government officials from blocking their critics on platforms like Facebook and Twitter.
Read more »
AOC Rebukes Alito 'Tantrum' and\u00a0 'Highly Politicized' Supreme Court'In our system of checks and balances, SCOTUS’s reckless behavior warrants a check from the legislative and executive branches,' says AOC. This is not unprecedented, it's how our system is designed to avert tyranny.'
Read more »
Democrats breathe temporary sigh of relief after Supreme Court order on abortion pillDemocrats express cautious optimism and Republicans voice frustration after the Supreme Court's decision to allow the abortion pill mifepristone to remain widely available.
Read more »
Supreme Court Rules to Protect Access to the Abortion Pill — For NowThe court’s ruling means mifepristone will continue to be legal as the case makes its way through the courts.
Read more »
Supreme Court justices ‘at each other’s throats’ as abortion pill access upheld legal expert saysThe Supreme Court blocked in full a decision by Texas-based U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk made on April 7 that invalidated the Food and Drug Administration’s longtime approval of the abortion pill mifepristone. Conservative Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito publicly dissented from the decision. Joy Reid and her panel discuss.
Read more »
The Supreme Court fight over an abortion pill: What’s next?Nothing will change for now. That’s what the Supreme Court said Friday evening about access to a widely used abortion pill.
Read more »