DIRS.INFO The most relevant business & tech news

☆ Public officials have new rules about blocking you on social media, SCOTUS decides
▼ + stars: | 2024-03-16 | by ( Katherine Tangalakis-Lippert | ) www.businessinsider.com time to read: +4 min

SCOTUS on Friday established new rules for the social media accounts of public officials. AdvertisementThe US Supreme Court on Friday handed down a decision establishing new rules for how public officials must behave on social media. Accounts clearly marked as personal, even if run by a state official, are granted more leniency and protection under the First Amendment. Advertisement"The distinction between private conduct and state action turns on substance, not labels: Private parties can act with the authority of the State, and state officials have private lives and their own constitutional rights," she continued. The issue of allowing public officials to block users on social media has been heard by the court before, when in 2017, Trump was challenged by the Knight Foundation over his choice to block critics on Twitter.

Persons: SCOTUS, —, Amy Coney Barrett, Kevin Lindke, James Freed, Freed, Lindke, Lucy, Husband, Jessie, Barrett, Trump, Friday's, Gary Lawkowski Organizations: Service, State, Knight Foundation, Twitter, Dhillon Locations: Detroit, Port Huron , Michigan, Port Huron , MI

☆ Supreme Court Sets Rules for Blocking Citizens From Officials’ Accounts
▼ + stars: | 2024-03-15 | by ( Adam Liptak | ) www.nytimes.com time to read: +1 min

The Supreme Court, in a pair of unanimous decisions on Friday, added some clarity to a vexing constitutional puzzle: how to decide when elected officials violate the First Amendment by blocking people from their social media accounts. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, writing for the court in the lead case, said two things are required before officials may be sued by people they have blocked. The court did not apply the new standard to the cases before them, involving a city manager in Port Huron, Mich., and two members of a school board in California. The cases were the first of several this term in which the Supreme Court is considering how the First Amendment applies to social media. The court heard arguments last month on whether states may prohibit large technology platforms from removing posts based on the views they express, and it will consider on Monday whether Biden administration officials may contact social media platforms to combat what they say is misinformation.

Persons: Amy Coney Barrett Organizations: Biden Locations: Port Huron, Mich, California

☆ In shadow of Trump tweets, Supreme Court outlines when officials can be sued for social media use
▼ + stars: | 2024-03-15 | by ( Lawrence Hurley | ) www.cnbc.com time to read: +5 min

The court ruled unanimously that officials can be deemed "state actors" when making use of social media and can therefore face litigation if they block or mute a member of the public. The court held that conduct on social media can be viewed as a state action when the official in question "possessed actual authority to speak on the state's behalf" and "purported to exercise that authority." While the officials in both cases have low profiles, the ruling will apply to all public officials who use social media to engage with the public. The cases raised the question of whether public officials' posts and other social media activity constitute part of their governmental functions. The court is wrestling with a whole series of social media-related free speech issues in its current term, which runs until June.

Persons: WASHINGTON —, Donald Trump's, Amy Coney Barrett, —, Barrett, Trump, Elon Musk, Michelle O'Connor, Ratcliff, T.J, Zane, Christopher, Kimberly Garnier, O'Connor, Christopher Garnier, James Freed, Kevin Lindke, Freed Organizations: Twitter, Poway Unified School District, of, Circuit, Southern District of, Port, U.S Locations: Southern California, Michigan, California, San Francisco, Southern District, Southern District of California, Port Huron City

The Authority of Law statue is seen outside the U.S. Supreme Court at the start of the new term in Washington, U.S., October 2, 2023. The Supreme Court is tasked with deciding whether the public officials engaged in a "state action" in blocking critics from social media accounts or were merely acting in their personal capacity. The justices also are due to decide other important cases involving speech on social media during their current nine-month term. One involves a challenge to Republican-backed state laws limiting the ability of social media platforms to remove or moderate content deemed objectionable or misinformation. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed, ruling that Zane and O'Connor-Ratcliff had presented their social media accounts as "channels of communication with the public" about school board business.

Persons: Evelyn Hockstein, Joe Biden's, Donald Trump's, Michelle O'Connor, Ratcliff, T.J, Zane, Christopher, Kimberly Garnier, O'Connor, Kevin Lindke, James Freed, Lindke, Freed, John Kruzel, Andrew Chung, Will Dunham Organizations: U.S, Supreme, REUTERS, WASHINGTON, Twitter, Facebook, Meta, Republican, Poway Unified School District, Circuit, Appeals, City, Thomson Locations: Washington , U.S, California, Michigan, Poway , California, Port Huron, Francisco, Cincinnati, New York

Blocking users is a function often employed on social media to stifle critics. The justices, hearing about three hours of arguments, focused on spelling out the circumstances for deciding whether public officials were acting in their personal capacity when blocking critics or engaged in a "state action." Conservative Justice Samuel Alito cited a hypothetical town manager who puts a municipal seal on his own social media page and tells citizens to express their views. Under this test, Mooppan argued, the social media activity of his clients was not governmental. Some justices asked whether requiring public officials to include disclaimers on their personal pages making clear their social media activity is not governmental would help disentangle their private and public capacities.

Persons: Samuel Alito, Alito, Hashim Mooppan, Mooppan, Elena Kagan, Donald Trump, " Kagan, Evelyn Hockstein, Trump, Joe Biden's, Michelle O'Connor, Ratcliff, T.J, Zane, Christopher, Kimberly Garnier, Kevin Lindke, James Freed, Freed, Ketanji Brown Jackson, Brett Kavanaugh, Victoria Ferres, Ferres, John Kruzel, Andrew Chung, Will Dunham Organizations: WASHINGTON, U.S, Supreme, Twitter, Facebook, Conservative, Liberal, REUTERS, Poway Unified School District, Circuit, Appeals, City, Thomson Locations: California, Michigan, Poway , California, Port Huron, Washington , U.S, San Francisco, Cincinnati, New York

☆ Shipwreck hunters found a schooner that sank in 1881 intact in Lake Michigan
▼ + stars: | 2023-09-02 | by ( George Glover | ) www.businessinsider.com time to read: +2 min

Maritime historians found a schooner that sank in 1881 intact in Lake Michigan. Brendon Baillod and Robert Jaeck found the shipwreck of the 156-year-old vessel back in July. The vessel is so well-preserved that its crew's possessions are still present. Baillod and Jaeck found the vessel by reading historical accounts of the shipwreck by survivors, then deploying side-scan sonar to track its location more accurately. AdvertisementAdvertisementLake Michigan shipwrecks are often found intact due to the lake's cold and fresh waters, which tend to preserve many items found onboard the sunken vessels.

Persons: Brendon Baillod, Robert Jaeck, Jaeck Organizations: Service, Lake Michigan —, Associated Press, AP, Wisconsin Historical Society and University of Wisconsin Sea Grant Institute Locations: Lake Michigan, Wall, Silicon, Wisconsin, Trinidad, Milwaukee, Chicago, Oswego , New York, Sturgeon, Port Huron, Algoma, Ontario, Canada, Michigan

At issue is whether a public official's social media activity can amount to governmental action bound by First Amendment limits on government regulation of speech. The Garniers sued O'Connor-Ratcliff and Zane in federal court, claiming their free speech rights under the First Amendment were violated. Zane and O'Connor-Ratcliff each had public Facebook pages identifying them as government officials, according to the Garniers' court filing. O'Connor-Ratcliff also had a public Twitter profile. Circuit Court of Appeals last July agreed, finding that the school board members had presented their social media accounts as "channels of communication with the public" about school board business.

☆ Supreme Court takes up legal spat over public officials blocking people on social media
▼ + stars: | 2023-04-24 | by ( Lawrence Hurley | ) www.cnbc.com time to read: +4 min

WASHINGTON, DC - APRIL 19: The Supreme Court of the United States, on Wednesday, April 19, 2023 in Washington, DC. But the legal dispute is the same: Can blocking someone on social media give rise to a free speech violation under the Constitution's First Amendment? It's a recurring question that has arisen at all levels of government as elected officials increasingly use social media to interact with voters. The appeals court concluded that the elected officials were acting in their official capacities and that social media accounts are akin to a public forum. The court also rejected the officials' argument that their social media pages were not official channels for members of the public to communicate with the government.

☆ Real-Estate Agents Face a Reckoning As Housing Market, Home Sales Slow
▼ + stars: | 2023-04-19 | by ( James Rodriguez | ) www.businessinsider.com time to read: +14 min

Just as the housing market goes through booms and busts, so do the ranks of real-estate agents. This has left real-estate agents fighting over a dwindling pool of listings. That makes the job of a local real-estate agent trickier and more nuanced than it was a year ago. "What makes a good real-estate agent and what makes a successful real-estate agent have almost no crossover." She joined a women's support group for real-estate agents on Facebook, where she found many others were experiencing similar challenges.

Search resuls for: "Port Huron"

9 mentions found