If a public official uses their account to communicate with the public in their role as an elected official, then their page or account is subject to the First Amendment, which protects free speech. That means they cannot engage in most forms of censorship, such as blocking someone or deleting someone’s comments simply because of the subject or their opinion.
That's because courts generally classify official social media pages for elected representatives and government organizations as "public forums"—meaning they have some of the strongest protections for free speech guaranteed by the First Amendment.
Last updated April 2022
Documentation
Confirmation
Take Action
Request Assistance
Last updated April 2022
Last updated April 2022
There is no bright-line rule to determine if a social media site is used for government business. In the prominent court cases addressing social media blocking, judges have looked at various factors (below) to consider whether a page is used for government business and, therefore, must be open to the public.
A social media page is likely conducting government business if the page:
PLEASE NOTE: This standard does not apply to an official’s personal or campaign social media pages—campaign and personal pages are NOT subject to the First Amendment. Campaign and personal pages can block you.
Factors to consider in determining if a page is a campaign page (Note: it is extremely important to go back to when the page was first created in addressing these factors):
Last updated April 2022
No. Because every social media page is different, each instance of censorship needs to be evaluated based on its specific facts.
Public officials can block comments not protected by the First Amendment, such as remarks that make a true and immediate threat to another person, incite others to imminently violate the law, or contain obscene language as defined by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Additionally, government entities and elected officials can establish a content-neutral social media policy, and the policy may not violate the First Amendment. The policy adopted must be enforced in a viewpoint-neutral and fair manner for all users. Comments that praise or criticize the official or government agency on a particular subject are allowed and cannot be deleted or blocked.
Last updated April 2022
No. Just because an individual gained public office doesn’t mean they are banned from having a private life or private social media. For First Amendment restrictions to apply, a social media page must be run by a government actor for the purposes of conducting government business.
For example, a state senator’s personal Facebook page, where they post photos of their kids and reviews of their favorite books or movies, does not qualify as an official government page. The senator can limit their audience and curate messages on their personal page just like any other private person.
Last updated April 2022
Not every page operated by a public official is a government account. A campaign page, to announce candidacy, and solicit funds and support for an election, is considered a private account. That's because a candidate, the person, is not a public official (at least not yet). So they can limit their audience and curate their message, including by censoring and blocking.
A social media account is considered a campaign account if it:
Last updated April 2022
Sign up to be the first to hear about how to take action.
By completing this form, I agree to receive occasional emails per the terms of the ACLU’s privacy statement.
By completing this form, I agree to receive occasional emails per the terms of the ACLU’s privacy statement.