Lifting the Fog Over Lobbying Compliance - updated with impact of COVID-19 on NYS lobbying community
[WEBINAR] "Walking the Line" - Public Agencies', Officials' and Employees' Roles in Local Elections
[WEBINAR] Who Does What? Defining Proper Roles for Staff and Elected Officials
Bribery & Corruption in the Military. A Front-Line View (Part II)
Ethics Laws and the Importance of Transparency for Public Officials
Blogging for Lawyers
The Supreme Court started yesterday with 14 decisions yet to deliver and only reduced the number by two—neither of them the Trump immunity case nor the Loper case concerning the future of the agency deference doctrine of...more
Lindke v. Freed, 2024 U.S. LEXIS 1214 (2024) (A public official who blocks someone from commenting on the official’s social-media page engages in state action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 only if the official both 1) possessed...more
On March 15, 2024, the United States Supreme Court issued a much-awaited decision on two cases that now create guardrails on when government officials can and cannot block private citizens from social media accounts....more
There are about 20 million state and local government employees across the United States. Many of them use social media for personal reasons or for official communications. ...more
On March 15, 2024, the United States Supreme Court handed down its decisions in Lindke v. Freed and O’Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier, two similar cases which broadly asked when public officials may be liable for their use of...more
On March 15, 2024, the Supreme Court of the United States issued decisions in Lindke v. Freed and Garnier v. O’Connor-Ratcliff, two cases which involved when public officials can block social media followers and delete their...more
The Supreme Court of the United States issued three decisions today: Lindke v. Freed, No. 22-611: This case addresses whether a public official violates the First Amendment by blocking individuals from commenting on the...more
The United States Supreme Court will soon decide whether public officials may be liable for blocking constituents on social media. On October 31, 2023, the Court heard oral argument in O’Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier and Lindke...more
As social media and K-12 education issues continue to evolve, on April 24, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in a case concerning an interesting, yet important issue: Under the First Amendment, when can elected...more
In 2018, the California legislature established a "ministry of truth" within the California Secretary of State's office - the Office of Elections Cybersecurity. By statute, the OEC has a duty “to monitor and counteract false...more
This week, the Court addresses whether the dismissal of a volunteer member of a municipal advisory board implicates the First Amendment and considers a challenge to zoning ordinances designed to limit sober living homes. ...more
The May 10, 2021 post The Donald Trump Twitter Case: Vacated and Dismissed as Moot by the Supreme Court reported how the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed Knight First Amendment Inst. at Columbia University v. Trump, in which the...more
In a unanimous ruling last week, the Court overruled a state law provision of the Public Employees Collective Bargaining Act that makes it an unfair labor practice to induce or encourage any individual in connection...more
On March 24, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision of interest to public entities and individuals serving in public office. In Houston Community College System v. Wilson, the Court declined to consider a...more
Two weeks ago was a win for boards of education and other public bodies in Connecticut and across the country. On March 24, 2022, the United States Supreme Court unanimously held in Houston Community College System v....more
Kathleen Wright Croft v. Donegal Township, 2021 WL 1110567 (W.D. Pa. 2021) (A township supervisor’s motion for a preliminary injunction against her fellow supervisors was denied upon finding that she was not deprived of...more
The June 14, 2018 post “The President May Not Block Twitter Followers Because They Disagree With Him Politically” reported how the District Court in Knight First Amendment Inst. at Columbia University v. Trump, 302 F.Supp.3d...more
New California Law Addresses Prohibition on Serial Meetings on Social Media - California public officials could run afoul of the Brown Act if they communicate with legislative members of the same body on social media...more
Widely considered a star of social media, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez backed down from a Twitter fight in the form of a lawsuit filed by one of her Twitter followers. The suit, filed by former New York assemblyman Dov Hikind,...more
The First Amendment continues to evolve to ensure speakers remain protected. This was recently substantiated by the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruling in Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University,...more
A recent federal appeals court decision, Knight First Amendment Institute v. Trump, concluded that action taken by the President through the use of his personal, not just official White House, Twitter account was considered...more
Two years ago, we wrote about a possible First Amendment challenge involving Donald Trump’s practice of blocking certain Twitter users from his @realDonaldTrump account. ...more
The court concluded its opinion with an observation that at this time in history, “wide-open, robust debate” is the best assurance of good government. The Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled last week that public...more
In a closely watched case, the Second U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held on July 8, 2019 that President Trump violated the First Amendment by blocking disfavored users on his @RealDonaldTrump Twitter account. This important...more
Social media has transformed the ways legislators and their staff interact with constituents. Through social media platforms, our elected officials share insights into the legislative process, communicate with constituents,...more