<
div class=”field field–name-body field–type-text-with-summary field–label-hidden”>
<
div class=”field__items”>
As we said last year, the U.S. Supreme Court has taken an unusually active interest in internet free speech issues over the past couple years.
All five pending cases at the end of last year, covering three issues, were decided this year, with varying degrees of First Amendment guidance for internet users and online platforms. We posted some takeaways from these recent cases.
We additionally filed an amicus brief in a new case before the Supreme Court challenging the Texas age verification law.
Public Officials Censoring Comments on Government Social Media Pages
Cases: O’Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier and Lindke v. Freed – DECIDED
The Supreme Court considered a pair of cases related to whether government officials who use social media may block individuals or delete their comments because the government disagrees with their views. The threshold question in these cases was what test must be used to determine whether a government official’s social media page is largely private and therefore not subject to First Amendment limitations, or is largely used for governmental purposes and thus subject to the prohibition on viewpoint discrimination and potentially other speech restrictions.
The Supreme Court crafted a two-part fact-intensive test to determine if a government official’s speech on social media counts as “state action” under the First Amendment. The test includes two required elements: 1) the official “possessed actual authority to speak” on the government’s behalf, and 2) the official “purported to exercise that authority when he spoke on social media.” As This article has been indexed from Deeplinks
Read the original article: