The question
Whether two school board members acted "under color of" state law under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 when they blocked constituents from commenting on their public social media pages.
O’Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier
What the Court decided
The Ninth Circuit judgment is vacated and the case remanded. The Court held that the Ninth Circuit's approach to the state-action requirement of 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 differs from the standard the Court set out the same day in Lindke v. Freed. The case is returned for reconsideration under that standard.
How the justices split
UnanimousPer curiam (unsigned)
Delivered by the Court
The Court explained that the two school board members created public social media pages to promote their campaigns and, after winning election, used the pages to post district-related content and communicate with constituents, then deleted and blocked the respondents' comments. The respondents sued under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 alleging a First Amendment violation. The Court held that the Ninth Circuit's approach to the state-action requirement, which relied on the official appearance and content of the pages, differs from the standard elaborated the same day in Lindke v. Freed, and it vacated the judgment and remanded for reconsideration under that standard.
How we know · 5 sourced claims
The decision was issued per curiam.
Source: syllabus, lineup
The Court vacated the Ninth Circuit judgment and remanded the case.
Source: syllabus, Held
The Court held that the Ninth Circuit's approach to Section 1983's state-action requirement differs from the standard the Court set out in Lindke v. Freed, 601 U.S. 187.
Source: syllabus, Held
The respondents sued the trustees under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 alleging a First Amendment violation after the trustees deleted their comments and blocked them from commenting on public social media pages.
Source: syllabus, Held
The case came to the Court on certiorari from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Source: syllabus, lineup