Can Politicians Block Critics From Their Social Media Platforms?

A case being heard in the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals has “potentially enormous First Amendment implications,” according to attorneys Christopher Fonzone and Joshua A. Geltzer – not to mention implications for the modus operandi of the President, who lost in a somewhat similar case earlier this year. (Trump is appealing that case, in the Second Circuit.) Fonzone and Geltzer, writing in the Washington Post, come down squarely on the side of what they consider the free speech side of this dispute, the question being whether or not an elected politician has the right to ban someone from his or her social media account. On behalf of some First Amendment scholars, they have filed a friend-of-the court brief in the 4th Circuit case, which involves a county official in Virginia who blocked a constituent from posting on her Facebook page. She did reconsider, and just hours later reinstated the constituent’s posting rights, a fact that was the basis for an unsuccessful lack-of-standing argument her attorneys made in the trial court. Another of their arguments was that Facebook is a private company and that blocking is simply a feature that company offers, but that didn’t carry either. As the authors explain, “Long-standing precedent makes clear government officials cannot avoid the First Amendment’s requirements simply by hosting public meetings on private property.”