공론장 법리의 확장 - 선출직 공직자들의 소셜 미디어 활용과 관련하여 - = Extension of Public Forum Doctrine -With Regard to Elected Officials’ Use of Social Media-

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Certain expressive activities require an access to places of expression. Especially, for citizens who can not access the mass media to deliver their messages, the places of expression have a great significance. These places are where we can communicate with other fellow citizens, and public opinion is formed through that communication. The United States Supreme Court called these spaces public fora, where the government must ensure citizens’ expressive activities and allow them to freely express what they want to say without exclusion or discrimination based on a viewpoint. Unlike the shrinking of public fora in real space, the internet is attracting attention with its role of expanding the scope of public fora. In particular, when politicians use social media like Twitter and Facebook as channels for policy publishing, opinion gathering, and public opinion formation, social media sites as an interactive place function as a venue where citizens can petition to elected officials, criticize government policies, and exchange opinions one another. Accordingly, the social media sites which is essentially private space, are paradoxically becoming public space. Therefore, guaranteeing expressive activities there is one of the new challenges of constitutional jurisprudence. With reference to the US case, this article examines whether the social media, when used by elected officials, constitute a public forum. If so, it further examines the limitations of elected officials’ power to block or censor expressions of constituents based on a political point of view.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 문재완, "표현의 자유와 민주주의 ― 청자(聽者) 중심의 표현의 자유 이론을 위한 시론 ―" 세계헌법학회한국학회 17 (17): 85-110, 2011

2 박승호, "표현의 자유와 공적광장이론 - 미연방대법원 판례를 중심으로 -" 법학연구원 (41) : 287-324, 2013

3 박용상, "표현의 자유" 현암사 2002

4 권혜영, "집회·시위의 전제로서 ‘장소’개념에 대한 고찰 - 미국의 ‘공적 광장이론’과 새로운 공간전술에 대한 비판 논의를 중심으로" 한국비교공법학회 11 (11): 3-30, 2010

5 문재완, "인터넷상 사적 검열과 표현의 자유" 한국공법학회 43 (43): 181-206, 2015

6 박용상, "언론의 자유" 박영사 2013

7 정윤정, "소셜 미디어의 공론장 기능 연구: 트위터 메시지의 타당성 및 시민성 분석, In 소통을 통한 사회통합과 신뢰회복의길 모색" 2014

8 황성기, "사적 검열에 관한 헌법학적 연구" 세계헌법학회한국학회 17 (17): 163-191, 2011

9 김배원, "미국헌법상의 정부언론(Government Speech)" 법학연구소 30 (30): 7-45, 2010

10 강일신, "공적공간의 민영화와 집회의 자유의 보호영역 - 독일연방헌법재판소의 'Fraport 결정'에 대한 비판적 검토 -" 유럽헌법학회 (17) : 439-462, 2015

11 尹明善, "美國憲法상 表現의 自由와 場所 - '公的 廣場' 理論을 중심으로 -" 미국헌법학회 14 : 1-31, 2003

12 Siddique, Bryan, "Tweets That Break the Law: How the President’s @RealDonaldTrump Twitter Account Is a Public Forum and His Use of Twitter Violates the First Amendment and the President Records Act" 42 (42): 2018

13 Peters, Jonathan, "The ‘Sovereigns of Cyberspace’ and State Action: The First Amendment’s Application (or Lack Thereof) to Third-Party Platforms" 32 : 2017

14 Fenger, Livia, "The FRAPORT Case of the First Senate of the German Federal Constitutional Court and its Public Forum Doctrine" 15 (15): 2014

15 Nunziato, Dawn Carla, "The Death of the Public Forum in Cyberspace" 20 : 2005

16 Brannon, Valerie, "Sidewalks, Streets, and Tweets: Is Twitter a Public Forum?"

17 Jørgensen, Rikke Frank, "New Technologies for Human Rights Law and Practice" Cambridge University Press 2018

18 Ciacchi, Aurelia Colombi, "Judicial Governance in Private Law through the Application of Fundamental Rights" 2014 (2014): 2014

19 Nunziato, Dawn Carla, "From Town Square to Twittersphere: The Public Forum Doctrine Goes Digital" 25 : 2019

20 Chemerinsky, Erwin, "Constitutional Law: Principles and Policies" Wolters & Kluwer 2011