O'Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier - podcast episode cover

O'Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier

Sep 19, 20244 min
--:--
--:--
Listen in podcast apps:
Metacast
Spotify
Youtube
RSS

Episode description

Welcome to Supreme Court Opinions. In this episode, you’ll hear the Court’s opinion in O'Connor-Ratcliff v Garnier.

In this case, the court considered this issue: Does a public official engage in state action subject to the First Amendment by blocking an individual from the official’s personal social media account, which the official uses to communicate about job-related matters with the public?

The case was decided on March 15, 2024. 

The Supreme Court held that the Ninth Circuit’s judgment—that 42 U-S-C § 1983’s state-action requirement was satisfied because of the “close nexus” between petitioners’ social media pages and their positions as public officials—is vacated, and the case is remanded in light of Lindke v Freed.

The opinion is presented here in its entirety, but with citations omitted. If you appreciate this episode, please subscribe. Thank you. 

For the best experience, listen in Metacast app for iOS or Android
Open in Metacast
O'Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier | Supreme Court Opinions podcast - Listen or read transcript on Metacast