LINDKE v. FREED

Legal Principle at Issue

Can public officials block users on social media accounts they use for official business?

Action

In a unanimous decision, the Court held that a public official who prevents someone from commenting on the official's social-media page engages in state action under §1983 only if the official both possessed actual authority to speak on the State's behalf on a particular matter, and purported to exercise that authority when speaking in the relevant social-media posts.

Facts/Syllabus

In 2014, James Freed was appointed as city manager of Port Huron. He previously had a private personal social media account on Facebook that eventually reached the 5000 friend limit, so he converted his private profile into a public page which allows more people to follow it. He updated the page to reflect his new title as the city manager, designated this page as representing a public figure, and on this page he shared personal updates about himself, but then also some information related to his work as city manager of Port Huron, including updates about the COVID-19 pandemic. When petitioner Kevin Lindke came across Freed's page, he posted criticism in response to Freed's posts about COVID-19. Freed deleted the comments, and eventually blocked Lindke from the page, which kept him from commenting on Freed’s page and its posts.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit departed from other courts that have considered similar cases to hold that Freed’s censorship did not violate the First Amendment. On June 30, 2023, FIRE filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court, urging it to hold that Freed and other officials who use “personal” accounts to carry out their official duties cannot violate the First Amendment by engaging in viewpoint censorship.

Importance of Case

Political officeholders widely recognize and embrace the power of social media.  From mayors to district attorneys, congressional representatives to police chiefs, public officials from America’s smallest towns and largest cities alike use social media to connect with citizens. Many officials—including President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump—continued to use their personal social media accounts to communicate with the public while in office.

Yet too many officials harness the power of social media while also selectively blocking or banning certain members of the public from interacting with their accounts. Government officials can’t have it both ways: Officeholders who opt to use their social media accounts as tools of governance forfeit the ability to cancel critics or delete unfavorable comments.