Naval Base Acknowledges First Amendment Violation, Agrees to End Viewpoint Censorship on Official Social Media 

The First Amendment doesn’t end where a government Facebook page begins. That’s the message of a favorable settlement reached in Rodriguez v. Dull a federal civil-rights lawsuit brought by the Center for Individual Rights on behalf of Sergio Rodriguez, a retired Army veteran, military spouse, and nationally recognized advocate for military families. Under the settlement, the Naval Submarine Base Kings Bay has agreed to permanently ban viewpoint-based censorship across all its official social media pages—a systemic policy change that extends far beyond one veteran and one Facebook page. 

The case began in August 2024, when a power outage left families on the base without electricity for more than twelve hours. Rodriguez turned to the base’s official Facebook page—where he had been an active participant for years—to criticize officials’ slow response and ask about temporary housing and compensation for spoiled food. Base officials responded by banning him from the page entirely and deleting every comment he had ever made.  

 Rodriguez sued for violations of his First Amendment rights. The base then quietly restored his access and asked the court to throw out the case, arguing there was nothing left to fight over. A federal judge rejected that argument, concluding that because the base failed to show its unconstitutional conduct would not recur, the case remained very much alive.  

“Base Facebook pages are where military families turn when they’re searching for answers,” said Rodriguez.“When I was banned, I lost the ability to advocate for those families. Those families lost access to a person who was willing to ask hard questions on their behalf. It wasn’t enough for the base to quietly restore my access without ever admitting they were wrong.” 

What CIR Won 

The settlement delivers concrete, enforceable policy changes that protect not just Rodriguez, but every member of the public who interacts with the base’s social media: 

• Acknowledgment of the constitutional violation. The base has recognized that blocking Rodriguez from the base’s Facebook page violated his First Amendment rights—a significant concession that validates the lawsuit’s claims.   
• A base-wide prohibition on viewpoint-based censorship. Naval Submarine Base Kings Bay has confirmed that no personnel will ban or block members of the public from any social media page, or remove or hide their posts or comments because of the viewpoint expressed. This is not a promise limited to Rodriguez—it protects everyone. 
• A public-facing policy statement on all base social media pages. Going forward, every base social media page must display the following notice:  
  “Posts and comments by members of the general public will not be removed, filtered, hidden, unpublished, blocked, or deleted based on the viewpoint expressed. Additionally, users, who are members of the general public, will not be banned or blocked based on the viewpoint expressed.”
  This puts the public on notice of their rights and puts base officials on notice that those rights are enforceable. 
•  A link to the U.S. Navy Social Media Handbook from the base Facebook page, ensuring the governing policy is publicly accessible. 
• A forward-looking commitment.  When revising its comment policies in the future, the base must continue to include a provision that users will not be blocked and comments will not be removed on the basis of the viewpoint expressed. This prevents future policy revisions from quietly walking back the protections won here.  
  

“Sergio Rodriguez was asking the kinds of questions anyone would ask during a long power outage,” said Michelle Scott, Associate Counsel at the Center for Individual Rights. “The Navy doesn’t get to open a comment section, invite the public, and then delete anyone who asks an inconvenient question. This settlement makes clear that the government can’t silence its critics with the click of a button.” 

Rodriguez v. Dull is the second favorable settlement CIR has won in this area. In Stanhope v. Hunt, CIR brought a similar challenge against the North Carolina National Guard for censoring a veteran on its official social media pages. Taken together, the two cases document a pattern of military agencies using their control over official social media to silence critics—and establish that the First Amendment follows government officials online, no matter which platform they choose. 

Government social media pages belong to the public, not the officials who run them. These settlements are a warning—that when officials open a digital forum and invite public comment, they can’t pick and choose what viewpoints will be allowed.