U.S. Supreme Court establishes clear test for classifying private social media use as state action

Image of smart-phones-stock.png

Key Takeaways

On March 15, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a 9-0 ruling in Lindke v. Freed, which together with O’Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier focused on the question of whether and when a public official’s use of a personal social media constitutes “state action” governed by the First Amendment (and therefore, subject to Section 1983 claims). In both cases, local citizens filed First Amendment lawsuits after being blocked from local officials’ personal social media accounts for making critical and repetitive comments. 

  • County nexus: The Court was asked to determine whether a local official’s personal social media account can be considered “state action,” which has consequences for county elected officials seeking to engage in their own private speech on social media platforms.
  • NACo advocacy: NACo filed an amicus brief with the Local Government Legal Center in support of neither party, arguing for a clear rule that limits the liability of county governments while protecting the First Amendment rights of public officials and citizens alike. Learn more here.
  • The Court’s ruling: In a favorable ruling for counties, the Court in Lindke v. Freed unanimously created a new constitutional test for determining whether government officials’ social media posts are attributable to the state: 1) the official must have authority to speak on behalf of the government and 2) must be exercising that power when creating the social media post in question. The Court vacated the judgements in both Lindke v. Freed and O’Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier and remanded them to the lower courts for  another look using this new test.

While the Court acknowledges that the test in question will still be fact specific, it has laid out an objective and clear rule that protects the speech of public officials and their constituents. County governments looking to protect public officials from liability in this area should examine the ruling, which includes hypotheticals and clarifications around application of this new test.
 

Related News

Image of cn_webmoneymatters_2.jpg
Advocacy

Counties Must Act Now: Submit Comments on OMB’s Proposed Overhaul of Federal Grant Rules

On June 17, NACo joined NLC, USCM, ICMA, NCSL, CSG, GFOA, NADO, AMPO, and NARC in requesting OMB Director Russell Vought for a 45 day extension for public comments to OMB’s proposed revisions to Title 2 of the Code of Federal Regulations (2 CFR), Part 200, Subtitle A, commonly referred to as Uniform Guidance for federal grants. 

Sen. Dirk Kempthorne (front row, fifth from left) joins a march to the U.S. Capitol during the 1994 NACo Legislation Conference. Photo by David Hathcox
County News

In Memoriam: Unfunded mandate reform bill sponsor Dirk Kempthorne

As a freshman senator, Dirk Kempthorne passed a law making it more difficult for Congress to impose the costs of mandates on state and local governments. 

2175754379
Advocacy

New Law Brings Long-Sought Transparency to FEMA Disaster Reimbursements

A new federal law requires FEMA to publish a publicly accessible, interactive dashboard tracking all Public Assistance reimbursement requests, giving counties unprecedented visibility into disaster recovery funding.