UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION

CHRISTINE POPP, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 1:19-cv-03664-JPH-DML ) MONROE COUNTY SHERIFF in his ) official capacity, ) ) Defendant. )

ORDER GRANTING JOINT MOTION FOR ENTRY OF AGREED DECLARATORY JUDGMENT

Christine Popp and Monroe County Sheriff filed a joint motion for entry of an agreed declaratory judgment. Dkt. [13]. For the reasons in the motion and this Order, the Court GRANTS the motion. On August 28, 2019, Ms. Popp filed a civil complaint for declaratory judgment and injunctive relief against the Monroe County Sheriff. Dkt. 1. The complaint alleges that the Sheriff violated the First Amendment by “hiding” comments on the Monroe County Sheriff’s official Facebook page based on the viewpoint expressed in those comments. Id.; see also dkt. 13. The Court has jurisdiction of this case under

. Declaratory relief is authorized by Rule 57 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and

and 2202. The parties agree that this case may be resolved with a declaratory judgment and that injunctive relief is not needed. Dkt. 13. The declaratory judgment agreed upon and proposed by the parties is supported by the weight of authority. The First Amendment forbids the State from exercising viewpoint

discrimination “even when the limited public forum is one of its own creation.” Rosenberger v. Rector & Visitors of the Univ. of Va.,

(1995). The interactive portion of an official government Facebook page is within the scope of First Amendment protection. See Packingham v. North Carolina,

, 1735–36 (2017) (social media is a “vast democratic forum” analogous to traditional public forums, such as parks). Therefore, “hiding” comments on the interactive portion of an official government Facebook page may be unconstitutional viewpoint

discrimination. See Robinson v. Hunt Cty., Texas,

(5th Cir. 2019) (a government official’s act of deleting certain comments from the sheriff department’s official Facebook page was unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination); see also Knight First Amendment Inst. at Columbia Univ. v. Trump,

(2d Cir. 2019); Davison v. Randall,

(4th Cir. 2019); One Wis. Now v. Kremer,

(W.D. Wis. 2019). Based on the facts presented in the record, the parties’ agreement

and the applicable law, the Court finds that the issuance of the declaratory judgment agreed upon and proposed by the parties is appropriate and GRANTS the motion, dkt. [13]. Final judgment shall enter accordingly. SO ORDERED. Date: 3/31/2020 SJamu Patrick ltawloe James Patrick Hanlon United States District Judge Distribution: Southern District of Indiana Lee F. Baker MONROE COUNTY LEGAL DEPARTMENT [email protected] Gavin Minor Rose ACLU OF INDIANA [email protected]