ACLU sues over social media censorship by Smithfield School District
"The school district is doing the wrong thing by restricting access to their accounts. All of the public deserves access to their social media pages and the information they post."
From a press release:
In a case seeking to protect individuals exercising their First Amendment rights from retaliation, ACLU of Rhode Island cooperating attorneys David Cass and Lynette Labinger today filed a federal lawsuit challenging the Smithfield School District’s actions in blocking a local school critic from the official X (formerly Twitter) accounts of the district and the school district superintendent.
The lawsuit is on behalf of Smithfield resident Daniel Mayer, who had regularly viewed and interacted with Superintendent Dawn Bartz’s X account page to stay informed about issues that Bartz addressed. However, after advocating for her resignation, he found himself blocked from following and viewing her posts last August. Since then, both Bartz and the school district have changed their X accounts to require approval for all users seeking access to those accounts. Over four months ago, Mayer sought that approval but remains blocked from both sites.
“I’m pursuing this case because I think it’s the right thing to do. The school district is doing the wrong thing by restricting access to their accounts. All of the public deserves access to their social media pages and the information they post,” said plaintiff Daniel Mayer.
The lawsuit, arguing that the censorship violates Mayer’s First Amendment rights “to speak and to petition the government for redress of grievances,” states: “Just as public officials may not preclude persons from participating in the public-comment portion of a town hall meeting based on their viewpoints or arbitrarily deny members of the public access to the meeting, Superintendent Bartz cannot ban users from the @SmithfieldSuper X account page because she dislikes their opinions or require formal approval to allow them access.”
The suit notes that both accounts are used to announce and describe school district policies and office operations; to share content produced for the town’s schools; and to communicate with constituents. The lawsuit argues that, as official accounts of the school district, access to them cannot be limited based on the identity or viewpoint of the individual seeking access.
The suit asks the court to declare the Smithfield School District and Smithfield Superintendent’s banning of the plaintiff and others from the X pages to be unconstitutional, to issue an injunction prohibiting the officials from banning anybody from the pages “on the basis of viewpoint,” and to bar the defendants from allowing only approved followers access to the X accounts. The suit also seeks an award of nominal damages and attorneys’ fees.
“Access to a City or Town’s social media accounts for information and comments is crucial for citizens to engage in discourse with their representatives,” said ACLU of RI cooperating attorney David Cass. “Improper restrictions of social media accounts by Cities and Towns hinder open discourse and access for meaningful participation with our government and diminish our democracy.”
Note: An earlier version of this piece misattributed a quote to the lawyer, rather than the plaintiff. This has been corrected.
SETTLEMENT REACHED IN SMITHFIELD SCHOOL DISTRICT SOCIAL MEDIA CENSORSHIP LAWSUIT
Today, the ACLU of Rhode Island announced the favorable settlement of a federal lawsuit that challenged, as a violation of the First Amendment, Smithfield School District’s actions in blocking a local school critic from the district’s and the superintendent’s official X (formerly Twitter) accounts. As a result of the settlement, the school district has agreed to unblock all individuals from the official X accounts and make both accounts public.
The lawsuit was filed less than a month ago by ACLU of Rhode Island cooperating attorneys David Cass and Lynette Labinger on behalf of Smithfield resident Daniel Mayer. Mayer had regularly viewed and interacted with Superintendent Dawn Bartz’s X account page to stay informed about issues that Bartz addressed in her official capacity. Last August, his X account was blocked from following and viewing her posts after he advocated for Bartz’s resignation. Since then, Bartz and the school district changed their X accounts to require all people to seek approval to access them.
Under the joint stipulation dismissing the lawsuit, the school district:
-Acknowledges that the plaintiff and all other accounts that the school district had previously banned from @SmithfieldSuper and @SmithfieldSchls X pages have now been unblocked;
-Agrees that no other users will be blocked from @SmithfieldSuper and @SmithfieldSchls X accounts “based on First Amendment-protected viewpoints expressed”;
-Agrees that the school district will no longer require pre-approval for people to gain access to @SmithfieldSuper and @SmithfieldSchls X accounts; and
-Will pay $12,000 in attorneys’ fees and court costs.
The lawsuit argued that the censorship violated Mayer’s First Amendment rights “to speak and to petition the government for redress of grievances.” Both accounts are used to announce and describe school district policies and office operations, share content produced for the town’s schools, and communicate with constituents. The lawsuit noted that as official accounts of the school district, access to them cannot be limited based on the identity or viewpoint of the individual seeking access.
ACLU cooperating attorney Cass said today: “Blocking a constituent from expressing their opinions based on their identity or viewpoint undermines their fundamental First Amendment right to speak and petition the government to redress grievances. Thankfully, with the assistance of counsel for the Smithfield School Committee, we were able to resolve the constitutionally inappropriate social media limitations the Smithfield School Department and Superintendent had imposed.”
A copy of the complaint and the settlement agreement can be found here.