(l-r) Harlan Stone, Anna S. Jewart, and Alexandra Farone of Babst, Calland, Clements and Zomnir. Courtesy photos Public Posting 2.0: High Court Creates Test for When Social Media Posts Are State Action
On March 15, the U.S. Supreme Court weighed in on an issue that more directly impacts the legal interests of public officials: When does a public official's social media activity on a personal account constitute state action under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, subjecting the public official to liability?
April 12, 2024 at 12:40 PM
7 minute read
State and Local Government
In August 2023, we discussed the ongoing trend of recent cases to blur the line between public officials' "public" and "private" digital communications and social media, focusing primarily on two 2023 Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court cases—Penncrest School District v. Cagle and Wyoming Borough v. Boyer. In these cases the courts were called upon to decide when a public official's own social media posts are "public" and therefore subject to disclosure under the Pennsylvania Right-to-Know Law (RTKL). While release of messages or comments intended to be kept private can be embarrassing, on March 15, the U.S. Supreme Court weighed in on an issue that more directly impacts the legal interests of public officials: When does a public official's social media activity on a personal account constitute state action under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, subjecting the public official to liability?
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
Appeals Court Rules Pittsburgh School District Immune to Suit Over Sex Abuse of Disabled Student
4 minute read
Pa. Court Denies Procedurally Deficient Request for Delay Damages in $4.1M Personal Injury Verdict
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Big Law Leaders Get Real on Business Impact of Election Results
- 2Survival Guide for Executives and Board Members: 4 Steps to Safeguard Against Individual Liability for Data Security Failures
- 3Growing Referral Network, Alternative Fees Have This Ex-Big Law’s Atty’s Bankruptcy Practice Soaring
- 4High-Flying Genetics Testing Firm GeneDx Hires Ex-Zoetis GC as Legal Chief
- 5Manhattan Prosecutors Say They Will Oppose Efforts by Trump Legal Team to Dismiss Case
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
