Lindke v. Freed

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Supreme Court of the United States
Lindke v. Freed
Term: 2023
Important Dates
Argued: October 31, 2023
Decided: March 15, 2024
Outcome
Vacated and remanded
Vote
9-0
Majority
Amy Coney Barrett • Chief Justice John Roberts • Clarence Thomas • Samuel Alito • Sonia Sotomayor • Elena Kagan • Neil Gorsuch • Brett Kavanaugh • Ketanji Brown Jackson

Lindke v. Freed is a case that was decided by the Supreme Court of the United States on March 15, 2024, during the court's October 2023-2024 term. The case was argued on October 31, 2023.

In a unanimous ruling issued on March 15, 2024, the Court vacated the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruling and remanded the case for further proceedings, holding, "A public official who prevents someone from commenting on the official’s social-media page engages in state action under §1983 only if the official both (1) possessed actual authority to speak on the State’s behalf on a particular matter, and (2) purported to exercise that authority when speaking in the relevant social-media posts."[1] Justice Amy Coney Barrett delivered the opinion of the Court. Click here for more information about the ruling.

HIGHLIGHTS
  • The issue: The case concerned section 1983 of Title 42 and public officials’ social media activity. Click here to learn more about the case's background.
  • The questions presented: “Whether a public official's social media activity can constitute state action only if the official used the account to perform a governmental duty or under the authority of his or her office.”[2]
  • The outcome: The U.S. Supreme Court vacated the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruling and remanded the case for further proceedings.


    • The case came on a writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. To review the lower court's opinion, click here.

    Timeline

    The following timeline details key events in this case:[3]

    Background

    James Freed created a private Facebook profile that eventually grew to reach Facebook’s 5,000 friend limit. Freed then changed his profile into a public page which allowed him to have an unlimited number of followers instead of friends, and used the page category of public figure.[4]

    In 2014, Freed was appointed by the mayor and city council of Port Huron, Michigan to be the municipality’s city manager. Freed added this new title to his Facebook page, listed the Port Huron website as his page's website, the city hall address as his page's address, and an email address from the city for his page's contact information. His posts included personal updates as well as information on city policies and initiatives.[5]

    In March 2020, Freed began to post information from the city and the state about the COVID-19 pandemic. Kevin Lindke commented several times on Freed’s page from three separate Facebook profiles. Two of those comments criticized Port Huron’s response to the pandemic. Freed deleted Lindke’s comments from his page. He also blocked Lindke’s accounts, denying him access to his page. Additionally, Freed blocked or deleted the comments of four other individuals.[4]

    Lindke sued Freed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan under 42 U.S.C § 1983. Lindke argued that by deleting his comments and blocking his Facebook accounts, Freed violated his First Amendment rights. The district court ruled against Lindke, and he appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. The circuit court affirmed the district court’s decision.[6]

    Questions presented

    The petitioner presented the following questions to the court:[2]

    Questions presented:
    “ Whether a public official's social media activity can constitute state action only if

    the official used the account to perform a governmental duty or under the authority of his or her office. [7]

    		”

    Oral argument

    Audio

    Audio of oral argument:[8]



    Transcript

    Transcript of oral argument:[9]

    Outcome

    In a unanimous ruling issued on March 15, 2024, the Court vacated the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruling and remanded the case for further proceedings, holding, "A public official who prevents someone from commenting on the official’s social-media page engages in state action under §1983 only if the official both (1) possessed actual authority to speak on the State’s behalf on a particular matter, and (2) purported to exercise that authority when speaking in the relevant social-media posts."[1] Justice Amy Coney Barrett delivered the opinion of the Court.

    Opinion

    In the court's majority opinion, Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote:[1]

    “ Like millions of Americans, James Freed maintained a Facebook account on which he posted about a wide range of topics, including his family and his job. Like most of those Americans, Freed occasionally received unwelcome comments on his posts. In response, Freed took a step familiar to Facebook users: He deleted the comments and blocked those who made them.


    For most people with a Facebook account, that would have been the end of it. But Kevin Lindke, one of the unwelcome commenters, sued Freed for violating his right to free speech. Because the First Amendment binds only the government, this claim is a nonstarter if Freed posted as a private citizen. Freed, however, is not only a private citizen but also the city manager of Port Huron, Michigan—and while Freed insists that his Facebook account was strictly personal, Lindke argues that Freed acted in his official capacity when he silenced Lindke’s speech.
    When a government official posts about job-related topics on social media, it can be difficult to tell whether the speech is official or private. We hold that such speech is attributable to the State only if the official (1) possessed actual authority to speak on the State’s behalf, and (2) purported to exercise that authority when he spoke on social media.[7]

    		”
    —Justice Amy Coney Barrett

    Text of the opinion

    Read the full opinion here.

    October term 2023-2024

    See also: Supreme Court cases, October term 2023-2024

    The Supreme Court began hearing cases for the term on October 2, 2023. The court's yearly term begins on the first Monday in October and lasts until the first Monday in October the following year. The court generally releases the majority of its decisions in mid-June.[10]


    See also


    External links

    Footnotes

    1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 U.S. Supreme Court, Lindke v. Freed, decided March 15, 2024
    2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 U.S. Supreme Court, "22-611 LINDKE V. FREED," accessed April 27, 2023
    3. ↑ U.S. Supreme Court, "No. 22-611," accessed April 27, 2023
    4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 Casetext, "Lindke v. Freed," accessed December 18, 2023
    5. ↑ The Supreme Court, "In The Supreme Court of The United States, Kevin Lindke V. James R. Freed – On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari," accessed December 18, 2023
    6. ↑ Oyez', "Lindke v. Freed," accessed December 18, 2023
    7. ↑ 7.0 7.1 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
    8. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, "Oral Argument - Audio," argued October 31, 2023
    9. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, "Oral Argument - Transcript," argued October 31, 2023
    10. ↑ SupremeCourt.gov, "The Supreme Court at Work: The Term and Caseload," accessed January 24, 2022
    v • e
    Ballotpedia
    About
    Editorial Content
    Geoff Pallay, Director of Editorial Content and Editor-in-Chief • Ken Carbullido, Vice President of Election Product and Technology Strategy • Norm Leahy, Senior Editor • Daniel Anderson, Managing Editor • Ryan Byrne, Managing Editor • Cory Eucalitto, Managing Editor • Mandy Gillip, Managing Editor • Doug Kronaizl, Local Elections Project Manager • Jaclyn Beran • Marielle Bricker • Joseph Brusgard • Emma Burlingame • Kelly Coyle • Thomas Ellis • Frank Festa • Nicole Fisher • Brianna Hosea • Joseph Greaney • Thomas Grobben • Jaime Healy-Plotkin • Tyler King • Glorie Martinez • Nathan Maxwell • Ellie Mikus • Jackie Mitchell • Ellen Morrissey • Mackenzie Murphy • Kaley Platek • Samantha Post • Adam Powell • Ethan Rice • Spencer Richardson • Victoria Rose • Briana Ryan • Myj Saintyl • Maddy Salucka • Maddie Sinclair Johnson • Abbey Smith • Alexis Thacker • Janie Valentine • Joel Williams • Samuel Wonacott • Trenton Woodcox
    Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=Lindke_v._Freed&oldid=9427655"