Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/20-197_5ie6.pdf
Page Number: 3

Cite as:  593 U. S. ____ (2021) 

3 

THOMAS, J., concurring 

I 
On the surface, some aspects of Mr. Trump’s Twitter ac-
count resembled a public forum.  A designated public forum 
is “property that the State has opened for expressive activ-
ity  by  part  or  all  of  the  public.”  International  Soc.  for 
Krishna  Consciousness,  Inc.  v.  Lee,  505  U. S.  672,  678 
(1992).  Mr. Trump often used the account to speak in his 
official capacity.  And, as a governmental official, he chose 
to make the comment threads on his account publicly acces-
sible,  allowing  any  Twitter  user—other  than  those  whom
he blocked—to respond to his posts.

Yet,  the  Second  Circuit’s  conclusion  that  Mr.  Trump’s 
Twitter  account  was  a  public  forum  is  in  tension  with,
among  other  things,  our  frequent  description  of  public  fo-
rums as “government-controlled spaces.”  Minnesota Voters 
Alliance v. Mansky, 585 U. S. ___, ___ (2018) (slip op., at 7); 
accord, Pleasant Grove City v. Summum, 555 U. S. 460, 469 
(2009)  (“government  property  and  . . .  government  pro-
grams”);  Arkansas  Ed.  Television  Comm’n  v.  Forbes,  523 
U. S. 666, 677 (1998) (“government properties”).  Any con-
trol Mr. Trump exercised over the account greatly paled in 
comparison to Twitter’s authority, dictated in its terms of
service,  to  remove  the  account  “at  any  time  for  any  or  no 
reason.”  Twitter exercised its authority to do exactly that. 
Because  unbridled  control  of  the account  resided  in  the 
hands  of  a  private  party,  First  Amendment  doctrine  may 
not have applied to respondents’ complaint of stifled speech.
See  Manhattan  Community  Access  Corp.  v.  Halleck,  587 
U. S. ___, ___ (2019) (slip op., at 9) (a “private entity is not 
ordinarily constrained by the First Amendment”).  Whether 
governmental  use  of  private  space  implicates  the  First 
Amendment  often  depends  on  the  government’s  control
over  that  space.  For  example,  a  government  agency  that
leases a conference room in a hotel to hold a public hearing
about a proposed regulation cannot kick participants out of 
the  hotel  simply  because  they  express  concerns  about  the