In a recent Virginia District Court
decision, the court held that “merely ‘liking’ a Facebook page is insufficient
speech to merit constitutional protection.” Bland v. Roberts, 2012 U.S.
Dist. LEXIS 57530 (E.D. Va. 2012). The case in question came before the
U.S. District Court of Eastern Virginia after B.J. Roberts of the Hampton,
Virginia Sheriff's Department fired five employees following his successful
reelection in 2009. The fired employees filed an action alleging that
they were fired in retaliation for their exercise of freedom of speech because
before the election, they each "Liked" the Facebook campaign
page of Roberts' opponent, Jim Adams.
Although holding a Facebook “Like”
was unprotected speech, the court recognized cases in which Facebook posts were
afforded constitutional protection. In those cases, there were actual
posts, either on a wall or in a comment, containing actual statements and
therefore sufficient speech to be protected by the First Amendment. The
court, holding a “Like” as unprotected speech, determined that a “Like” is “not
the kind of substantive statement that has previously warranted constitutional
protection. The Court [would] not attempt to infer the actual content of
[Plaintiffs’] posts from one click of a button on [a] Facebook page.” Bland v. Roberts,
2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57530 (E.D. Va. 2012).
