FYI: Will Blocking remain legal for all in the USA? Supreme Court to rule on issue.

Today, the US Supreme Court agreed to consider two cases which challenge
the legality of social media blocking by individuals who are also
government officials. (See: O'Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier
<https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/22-324.html>
and Lindke v. Freed
<https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/22-611.html>
)

Given that blocking is a feature often cited as a significant feature of
SocialWeb systems and of federated systems, it seems to me that these cases
could have an important impact on the use and even design of social systems
used in the USA. Their resolution may also impact the viability, or
utility, of proposed methods that might provide users with greater control
over replies to content they post.

While these cases address only issues related to an individual's explicit
blocking of other individuals, I can't help wondering if a future case
might limit an individual's freedom to choose which instance to use. If
SCOTUS rules against blocking, might individuals with government roles be
barred from using instances that provide instance-level blocking or either
individuals or other instances?

The formal questions to be addressed in these cases are:

   - O'Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier
   <https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/22-324.html>:
   "Whether a public official engages in state action subject to the First
   Amendment by blocking an individual from the official’s personal
   social-media account, when the official uses the account to feature their
   job and communicate about job-related matters with the public, but does not
   do so pursuant to any governmental authority or duty.''
   - Lindke v. Freed
   <https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/22-611.html>:
   "Whether a public official’s social media activity can constitute state
   action only if the official used the account to perform a governmental duty
   or under the authority of his or her office."

bob wyman