I agree. I also think the district court in this case made a stupid ruling. Luckily: a) This ruling only applies to the particular district in Virgina where

I agree. I also think the district court in this case made a stupid ruling. Luckily: a) This ruling only applies to the particular district in Virgina where this case came up. b) The district court ruled that the "likes" were not protected speech because "liking" is not making an actual statement on the record of support (i.e. a written statement). However, this ruling is inconsistent with previous supreme court rulings around free speech. For example, in Tinker v. Des Moines, the supreme court ruled that a group of students wearing black armbands against the Vietnam was a form of protected speech even though there was no written or verbal statement involved in the speech. In Texas v. Johnson, the supreme court ruled that flag-burning was a form of protected speech as well. Since flag-burning and wearing armbands as a form of protest are protected speech, and both are forms of speech that do not involve written or spoken proclamations, I have no idea why the district court ruled that "liking" on Facebook was somehow different.