The right to freedom of speech has been an integral part of the legal landscape in the United States for more than two centuries, but in recent years the landscape has begun to shift as technology advances. In particular, the question of whether government officials can legally block social media critics has come to the fore. The issue is being debated in the courts, but the ultimate decision has not yet been made. The debate was sparked when a group of seven individuals filed a lawsuit against President Donald Trump alleging that he had violated their First Amendment rights when he blocked them on Twitter. The plaintiffs argued that by blocking them, they were prevented from accessing information tweeted by the president as well as participating in conversations on the topic. The district court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, finding that the president had violated their First Amendment rights. The court reasoned that the government cannot restrict the public’s right to participate in the public square, even if it is the President of the United States blocking people. The ruling was quickly appealed to the United States Supreme Court. The court is still deliberating on the case, and a decision has yet to be made. The case could have far reaching implications for the way public officials use social media. No matter what the court decides, the case has already brought attention to the issue of social media censorship. The case has shown that social media can be a powerful tool for political expression and debate – and that public officials should be aware of the potential implications of blocking critical voices on social media. It remains to be seen how the Supreme Court will rule on the issue. But it’s clear that the issue of freedom of speech in the digital age is only going to become increasingly important in the years ahead. Whether government officials can legally block social media critics may soon be a matter for the courts to decide.