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 Capitol-closeup_2.jpg
Advocacy

NACo sends letter to congressional appropriations committees urging federal investments in county government activities

On July 9, NACo sent a letter to leaders of the U.S. House and U.S. Senate Appropriations Committees urging them to adequately fund key federal programs of importance to counties in the Fiscal Year (FY) 2026 discretionary appropriations bills.

US Capitol
Advocacy

U.S. Congress passes reconciliation bill: What it means for counties

On July 3, the U.S. Congress passed sweeping budget reconciliation legislation. 

Dave Lucas, director of finance and intergovernmental affairs at the New York State Association of Counties (NYSAC), Westchester County, N.Y.; Ben Boykin, a Westchester County, N.Y. legislator and NYSAC president and NYSAC Executive Director Stephen Acquario were among the county officials who met with lawmakers June 24.
County News

County officials voice concern for SNAP, Medicaid amid reconciliation vote

Ahead of the Senate and House's budget reconcilliation votes, county officials from five states traveled to Capitol Hill June 24, to advocate against its provisions related to the social safety net programs.