Politicians Cannot Block Social Media Foes, US Appeals Court Rules (reuters.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Reuters: A federal appeals court said on Monday a Virginia politician violated the Constitution by temporarily blocking a critic from her Facebook page, a decision that could affect President Donald Trump's appeal from a similar ruling in New York. In a 3-0 decision, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said Phyllis Randall, chair of the Loudoun County Board of Supervisors, violated the First Amendment free speech rights of Brian Davison by banning him for 12 hours from her "Chair Phyllis J. Randall" page.

The ban came after Davison had attended a 2016 town hall meeting, and then under his Facebook profile "Virginia SGP" accused school board members and their relatives of corruption and conflicts of interest. Randall had also removed her original post and all comments, including Davison's. Circuit Judge James Wynn rejected Randall's argument that her Facebook page was a private website, saying the "interactive component" was a public forum and that she engaged in illegal viewpoint discrimination. Davison's speech "occupies the core of the protection afforded by the First Amendment," Wynn wrote.

Comments

Re: I understand it. I even described it.

[Zero__Kelvin]

No, there isn't. In fact the whole point of the story is that there is no problem since the correct ruling was made. This is no different than if the politician was at a mall somewhere. If you think that sounds absurd, where did fuckface von clownstick announce his candicy for dictator ... I mean CEO of the US ... I mean President?