Lindke v. Freed

Kevin Lindke sued James Freed, the city manager of Port Huron, Michigan, after Freed deleted Lindke's critical comments and blocked him from his Facebook page. Freed used the page for both personal and official purposes. The case reached the U.S. Supreme Court, which on March 15, 2024, issued a unanimous decision. The Court established a test for determining when a public official's social media activity constitutes state action under the First Amendment: the official must possess actual authority to speak on behalf of the government, and must have purportedly exercised that authority in the specific posts at issue. The Court vacated the Sixth Circuit's judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with the new standard.

The Supreme Court unanimously vacated the lower court's ruling and remanded the case, holding that a public official's social media activity is attributable to the state only if the official had actual authority to speak on the government's behalf and purported to exercise that authority in the relevant posts.

Whether a public official's decision to block a constituent from a mixed-use social media account constitutes state action subject to the First Amendment's prohibition on viewpoint discrimination.

The ruling provided a much-needed framework for lower courts to evaluate countless disputes over public officials' social media blocking. It clarified the boundary between personal and official online conduct, shaping how government entities and elected officials across the United States manage digital engagement with constituents while protecting free speech rights.