Manhattan Community Access Corp. v. Halleck
587 U.S. ____ (2019) (2019)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A private entity that operates public access channels on a privately-owned cable system is not a state actor subject to the First Amendment, because operating such channels is not a traditional, exclusive public function.
Facts:
- New York City designated Manhattan Neighborhood Network (MNN), a private nonprofit corporation, to operate the public access channels on Time Warner's privately-owned cable system in Manhattan.
- DeeDee Halleck and Jesus Papoleto Melendez were producers who created programming for MNN's public access channels.
- Halleck and Melendez produced and submitted a film that was critical of MNN's alleged neglect of the East Harlem community.
- After MNN televised the film, it received multiple complaints about the film's content.
- In response to the complaints, MNN temporarily suspended Halleck from using the public access channels.
- Following a subsequent dispute, MNN suspended both Halleck and Melendez indefinitely from all MNN services and facilities.
Procedural Posture:
- DeeDee Halleck and Jesus Papoleto Melendez sued Manhattan Neighborhood Network (MNN) in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, alleging a violation of their First Amendment rights.
- MNN filed a motion to dismiss the First Amendment claim, arguing it was not a state actor.
- The District Court (court of first instance) granted MNN's motion to dismiss.
- Halleck and Melendez, as appellants, appealed the dismissal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
- The Second Circuit (intermediate appellate court) reversed the District Court's decision, holding that MNN was a state actor subject to the First Amendment.
- The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari to resolve a disagreement among the Courts of Appeals on the issue.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a private, non-profit corporation that operates public access channels on a privately-owned cable system become a state actor for First Amendment purposes?
Opinions:
Majority - Justice Kavanaugh
No. A private entity that operates public access channels on a privately-owned cable system does not become a state actor for First Amendment purposes. The Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment only constrains government actors, not private entities. A private entity can be deemed a state actor only under limited circumstances, such as when it performs a function that has been 'traditionally exclusively reserved to the State.' Operating public access channels does not meet this high bar, as this function has historically been performed by a variety of both private and public entities since its inception. Furthermore, merely providing a forum for speech—an activity many private entities like shopping malls or comedy clubs engage in—does not transform a private entity into a state actor. Finally, neither extensive state regulation nor a government designation to operate a service converts a private entity into a state actor, as established in precedents like Jackson v. Metropolitan Edison Co. MNN is a private actor and is therefore not subject to First Amendment constraints on its editorial discretion.
Dissenting - Justice Sotomayor
Yes. A private corporation that operates public access channels under these circumstances is a state actor subject to the First Amendment. This case is not about a private entity simply opening its own property to the public; it is about an organization appointed by the government to administer a constitutional public forum. New York City acquired a property interest, akin to an easement, in the public-access channels when it granted a cable franchise to Time Warner. State regulations require these channels to be open to the public on a non-discriminatory basis, effectively creating a public forum. When the City delegated its constitutional duty to administer this forum to MNN, MNN stepped into the City's shoes. Under the principle established in West v. Atkins, when a government entity contracts out its constitutional responsibilities to a private party, that private party becomes a state actor for purposes of fulfilling those duties.
Analysis:
This decision reinforces the narrowness of the 'public function' test within the state-action doctrine, making it more difficult to hold private entities accountable under the First Amendment. The Court clearly distinguished between a private entity voluntarily opening its property for speech and a private entity being delegated a constitutional duty by the government. The ruling has significant implications for modern platforms, especially in the context of social media, suggesting that hosting speech, even when subject to regulation, does not transform a private platform into a state actor. This strengthens the editorial discretion of private entities that manage forums for public expression.
