![]() ![]() It is important to remember that people who hold public office can wear two hats: Sometimes, they act as private individuals, and other times they are government actors. We filed a friend-of-the-court brief in support of Davison, arguing that officials cannot prevent people from joining in a public conversation because of their viewpoints, and the three-judge appeals court panel agreed. (President Trump has used some of the same arguments in a lawsuit against him for blocking people on Twitter.) Randall countered that she has the authority to control the page’s content - including the comments. The critic, Brian Davison, represented by the Knight First Amendment Institute, filed a lawsuit arguing that Randall had violated his First Amendment rights by removing him from a public forum - space the government makes available for people’s expressive activity - because she disagreed with his views. The case arose after the chair of a local board of supervisors in Virginia, Phyllis Randall, briefly blocked a critic from her official Facebook page and deleted a comment he made about her colleagues’ management of public funds. On Monday, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the interactive portion of a public official’s Facebook page is a “public forum,” so an official cannot block people from it because of the opinions they hold. ![]() So, if your elected representative has an official Facebook page where she invites comments, can she block you from commenting because you criticize her work?Īccording to a federal appeals court, the answer is a resounding no. One of the core purposes of the First Amendment is to allow people, regardless of their views, to hold the government accountable through expression.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |