While the U.S. Supreme Court deems access to social media platforms protected by the First Amendment, that doesn’t mean that some people can’t be restricted. A California state appeals court ruled that a “narrowly tailored” limit on social media use for a juvenile on probation was legal, NextGov reports. When reviewing the case in question, AA v. The People, the court of appeals wrote in summary:

One of the goals of the juvenile law is reformation and rehabilitation of the minor’s attitude so that he respects the rights of others. Here, appellant seems to think that his felonious conduct is a springboard for braggadocio on the internet. Appellant has First Amendment freedom of speech rights. But the juvenile court may curtail such rights in an appropriate case by a narrowly tailored condition of probation. This is an appropriate case.

The U.S. Supreme Court has called social media platforms the new public square, protected by the 1st Amendment; however, the terms of an individual’s probation or parole can restrict access to such platforms for rehabilitation purposes and to protect victims.

The Right to Access Social Media

The Supreme Court ruling in Packingham v. North Carolina, that social media use was protected, involved a North Carolina law that made sex offenders having any social media presence at all a felony, according to the article. In AA v. The People, the juvenile was only restricted from posting about his offense during his probation.

Conditional release typically comes with restrictions on freedom. Social media use is a right to people under normal circumstances, but not when a person is a ward of the state. What a person does and how they communicate with others can, as seen in the above case, restrict the use of social media which is liable to make any young person upset and in said case appeal.

Orange County Juvenile Justice

Please contact the Law Offices of Katie Walsh for a free consultation if your son or daughter requires legal assistance. Attorney Walsh and her team can advocate from your family and help you obtain the best possible outcome.

Words of inspiration can enable people to have the courage to be bold and accomplish great things. Unfortunately, what people say can also have the power to cause great harm, especially to those who are struggling. The cliché saying “sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me” does not always hold true. People have the ability to exert their influence over their peers, causing them to do harm to themselves or others.

We all, in America, are guaranteed the right to free speech under the First Amendment. It is a cherished right that helps make the United States a great nation. However, there are times when the right to speak freely comes into question, incidents when what people write or say leads to a death for instance. Such is the case of a Michelle Carter, who in the 2014 sent dozens of text messages to her boyfriend Carter Roy III, 18, urging him to take his own life.

Roy did in fact take his own life, which Michelle Carter will stand trial for in Massachusetts, the Associated Press reports. A grand jury unanimously ruled that Carter’s texts had a “direct, causal link” to Roy’s death. Carter is being charged with involuntary manslaughter, and if she is found guilty the case could set a historic precedent.

“In sum, we conclude that there was probable cause to show that the coercive quality of the defendant’s verbal conduct overwhelmed whatever willpower the eighteen year old victim had to cope with his depression, and that but for the defendant’s admonishments, pressure, and instructions, the victim would not have gotten back into the truck and poisoned himself to death,” Justice Robert Cordy wrote for the court in the ruling.

One of the text messages that then 17 year old Carter sent her unstable boyfriend, who got out of his truck that he was filling up with tailpipe exhaust, instructed Roy to “get back in,” according to the article. When Roy was unsure about going through with the suicide, Carter wrote:

• “I thought you wanted to do this. The time is right and you’re ready, you just need to do it!”
• “You can’t think about it. You just have to do it. You said you were gonna do it. Like I don’t get why you aren’t.”

Naturally, Carter’s attorney Joseph Cataldo is claiming that her texts were free speech, falling under the protection of the First Amendment and were not the cause of Carter’s death. Cataldo pointed out that Massachusetts doesn’t have a law against encouraging or assisting suicide.

Katie Walsh is an attorney in Orange County, California. Attorney Walsh concentrates her law practice on juvenile defense, criminal defense, and victim’s rights.

Contact the Law Offices of Katie Walsh online or at (714) 351-0178.