EFF Urges Supreme Court to Make Clear That Government Officials Have First Amendment Obligations When They Use Their Social Media Accounts for Governmental Purposes

Washington, D.C. — EFF urged the Supreme Court today to send a loud and clear message to government officials around the country who use social media in furtherance of their official duties, but then block people who criticize them: doing so violates our First Amendment right to receive and respond to government communications.

EFF, Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, and Woodhull Freedom Foundation asked the court in a brief filed today to protect the First Amendment rights of people to access and comment on the communications elected officials post on social media to advance their official duties.

The use of social media by government officials and agencies is routine, and courts are grappling with the question of when that use is subject to First Amendment limitations and when it is not, including whether they can block people whose views they don’t like. In today’s Supreme Court brief, EFF and its partners argued that the Justices should establish that, in determining whether an official’s use of social media is state action subject to the First Amendment, courts must employ a functional test that looks to how an account is actually used. If the use does qualify as state action, the brief argues, then courts must apply the well-established ban on viewpoint discrimination in public and nonpublic forums, meaning that the officials cannot block views just because they disagree with them.

“Social media has become an

[…]
Content was cut in order to protect the source.Please visit the source for the rest of the article.