Supreme Court Rules on Social Media Case

Well, the Supreme Court is laying out new guidelines for government employees using social media. The Justice is saying it's okay for government officials to block followers, but only in some circumstances. The case started when local government officials in Michigan and California blocked followers who were critical of them on Facebook, and their constituents actually challenged them. Joining us now to explain exactly what the Supreme Court has said in this ruling is our senior correspondent Devin Dwyer. So Devin, let's just talk about what this ruling means for social media users and the power that it gives government officials.

It's a great case, Kyra, because these days just about everybody in office, as you know, has a Facebook or an X account in their name. This case took on the big question of when can government officials block you or delete your comments on social media when it comes to being a government official and when it interacts with personal conduct? The First Amendment, as you know, protects the ability of all of us for free speech. It also protects the ability of public officials to have their own lives. But the Supreme Court today, in a unanimous opinion, said that what really matters here is the substance, not the status of the person saying it. (01:17) In other words, does an official have an actual authority to speak on a subject, and are they purporting to exercise that authority? If they are on both of those counts, Kyra, they cannot block you or delete their criticism. It's a pretty narrow standard, which means that the Supreme Court today did concede implicitly at least that there are cases when it would be appropriate for a government official on a private account to block you from reading their page or posting comments, so pretty interesting. But the Supreme Court splitting the difference, Kyra, in this case saying in not all cases can public officials say, @RealDonaldTrump or @JoeBiden, block you or delete comments when you're online.

Got it. So then where does the case go from here?

Well, those two cases you mentioned, one out of Michigan and one out of California will now go back to lower courts where they'll take another look at the facts in those cases. I was in Michigan in Port Huron earlier this year where we met the man, Kevin Lindke, who was suing the city manager, James Freed, over this very issue. Lindke had commented on Freed's page on Facebook about his handling of the COVID pandemic, said that he did an abysmal job. Freed deleted the comments, blocked him from Facebook. This case ensued. Now, the appeals court, Kyra, will have to use this new test from the Supreme Court today to decide whether the city manager and all other public officials are violating the First Amendment rights of their residents when they censor their feedback on social media.

Devin, thanks and have a great weekend.

You too. See you.