logo
NYC pol accused of blocking critics from posting on her social media and dares naysayer to take her to court: ‘Not democratic'

NYC pol accused of blocking critics from posting on her social media and dares naysayer to take her to court: ‘Not democratic'

Yahoo21-04-2025
A Brooklyn Assembly member is allegedly blocking locals from making posts she doesn't like on her social media pages — and she even dared one critic to take her to court.
Greenpoint's Emily Gallagher, a Democratic socialist, has been stealthily deleting critical or uncomplimentary comments or has altogether restricted certain users from interacting with her political media pages for as long as she's been in office, The Post has learned.
That could be a First Amendment violation as a public official, according to experts.
'The parallels between the way that she operates and the way theocracy operates or how fascism starts, it's right on the money,' Shannon Phipps, the founder of the Berry Street Alliance, told The Post.
Phipps said she has been blocked from Gallagher's Instagram account since June 2024 after years of publicly blasting the city's Open Streets program, which the Assembly member supports.
Phipps said she had noticed that her replies in response to Gallagher's tweets seemingly disappeared shortly after she posted them — possibly as part of an X feature that allows users to 'hide' unwelcome interactions.
Other neighbors have lodged similar allegations in recent months — with claims they are being punished for criticizing Gallagher's policies or simply for asking her to take action on neighborhood issues.
Gallagher's public Instagram page on Thursday showed minimal negative comments. Various posts indicated that there were numerous comments that were not populating under pictures — an indication that she might have hidden them from the public.
The Post also viewed various screenshots showing that Gallagher restricted several users from directly interacting with her on social media.
'People are being blocked for having a political critique of her, or if you're posting something about a political issue that you want her to pay attention to. It's that stuff. It's not, 'Emily, you're fat and ugly.' It's the real stuff,' Phipps said.
Denise Meyerson, who has lived in the neighborhood for more than two decades, first noticed she was restricted from commenting on Gallagher's Instagram posts back in 2021 — the same year the politician took office.
Meyerson had been critical of Gallagher's support for the McGuiness bike lane and demanded that the politician step in on a plan to turn 300 free parking spots on Meeker Avenue into metered spots.
'I would comment on her posts and then my comments would disappear. It was related directly to neighborhood things, but she always erased comments,' Meyerson said.
The Brooklynite even called out Gallagher for censoring her posts, leaving up only those that were complimentary, but the politician pleaded innocent, screenshots shared with The Post show.
Even more brazenly, the Rochester transplant dared Meyerson to take her complaints to court, saying: 'Feel free to take it to court, but it wasn't intentional. But this tactic of repeatedly commenting on every post with totally inaccurate statements is pretty frustrating!'
Meyerson countered 'that's her attitude.'
'She doesn't handle being a local politician very well,' Meyerson said. 'She's not really mature enough for the position of being like a diplomat in the neighborhood.'
'It's very frustrating and it's not democratic, which they claim to be. It's absolutely not. It gives me no faith in the local government.'
The censorship is even more egregious because Gallagher does not respond to constituent emails and her office runs limited hours, both Phipps and Meyerson alleged, adding that only those with mirroring viewpoints get a callback.
When reached for comment, Gallagher did not acknowledge allegations around censorship, but said she offers plenty of real-life opportunities for her constituents to connect.
'Our office takes accessibility and availability extremely seriously,' she said in a statement. 'We host regular, in-person events and have a public office, open phone lines, and email access. We engage in conversations all day long with constituents — those who agree with us and those who don't.'
Should Gallagher be found to be deleting or restricting comments, there is no question that she would be acting in clear violation of the First Amendment because her accounts — under the username 'emilyassembly' — are clearly marked for office, according to Diane Peress, who teaches constitutional law at John Jay College of Criminal Justice.
'A social media page is created so that there can be communication exchanges with your constituents. You can't block people because you don't like the message,' Peress said.
Peress pointed to a similar case lodged against President Trump in 2018, which resulted in a federal judge ruling the president could not block critics from his social media pages. A second lawsuit was filed in 2020, but because the case dragged on until Trump was voted out of office, the Supreme Court ultimately dropped it.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has also been hit with several civil suits by people she's allegedly blocked — a move she admitted to making back in 2019 because they were allegedly harassing her.
But even cyberbullying doesn't excuse stifling free speech, said Peress.
'If you were doing this as part of your job as a public servant, I cannot think of a case where you can allow some people to post and go back and forth, and you can't allow other people. You're basically discriminating because of the message. You can't do that,' Peress said.
Phipps is considering taking legal action against Gallagher.
The censorship hits especially hard for the civic leader, whose father immigrated to the US from Iran in the late 70s in search of the very freedoms she accused Gallagher of suppressing.
'He left a very violent situation where half of our family was being killed. People were protesting for freedom. They were losing their lives. They were disappearing and being oppressed … I've never even been able to go back to the country because it's been so much turmoil since I was born,' Phipps explained.
'There's no freedom of speech, there's no freedom of press. There's no freedom to engage in politics. It's a theocracy. It's all through the eyes of God. So I really have no tolerance for this in Williamsburg in 2025.'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

How Trump is bursting the bureaucrats' DC bubble, one agency at a time
How Trump is bursting the bureaucrats' DC bubble, one agency at a time

New York Post

timea few seconds ago

  • New York Post

How Trump is bursting the bureaucrats' DC bubble, one agency at a time

A hallmark of President Donald Trump's second term is that he's not just promoting his own policies — he's looking to shake up the American power structure from top to bottom. Step by step, he is undermining or destroying the left's decades-old program to achieve total dominance of government and politics through its control of money and institutions. That's what Trump is up to with his plan to move much of the federal bureaucracy out of the Washington, DC, area and into the rest of the country. Advertisement In doing so, he's infuriating federal bureaucrats leading cushy lives in DC and its suburbs, close to the centers of power — and close to the various contractors and lobby groups that can be expected to offer them well-padded post-retirement jobs. And, as with the other things Trump is doing, this effort is both good politics and good for the country, regardless of the bureaucrats' howls. 'Agencies,' Trump wrote in an April executive order, 'must be where the people are.' Advertisement Thus, the administration is moving much of the Department of Agriculture out to farming areas. About 2,600 out of 4,600 DC-based employees will be relocated to Salt Lake City, Utah; Fort Collins, Colo.; Indianapolis, Ind.; Kansas City, Mo., and Raleigh, NC, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins announced last week. 'This administration [isn't] interested in supporting staff or even really in the jobs we do,' one underling whined to Politico. 'They are concentrating power and want fewer witnesses to what they are doing,' another charged. Advertisement This is great news for the Republican Party, because the accumulation of federal employees in and around our nation's capital has turned the District of Columbia and its surrounding counties into a one-party state for the Democrats. That has pulled the entire state of Virginia into the Democratic orbit, simply because of the many federal employees and hangers-on voting in its northern counties. Sending them elsewhere will break up that power center, dispersing their votes in state and local elections while letting some air out of the DC bubble. When Trump moved some USDA workers to Kansas City in his first term, it triggered a 'mass exodus' from the department. Advertisement Every morning, the NY POSTcast offers a deep dive into the headlines with the Post's signature mix of politics, business, pop culture, true crime and everything in between. Subscribe here! Many federal agriculture specialists apparently concluded that quitting their jobs was preferable to living in America. This move is bigger, and if it triggers more departures it will help Trump slash federal payrolls that much faster. If not, though, bureaucrats in their new locations will presumably show more sensitivity to farmers, and shed some of their poisonous inside-the-beltway mentality. The Agriculture Department is just the start: Last week an angry mass letter from National Science Foundation employees railed against the NSF's impending move from Alexandria, Va., to an unknown new location. Overall, Trump wants to move 100,000 federal workers from various agencies out of the DC area. That will do much to solve one of the most widespread complaints about the federal government: It's run by people who live in a bubble. Advertisement Surrounded by upper-middle-class (and richer) professionals, federal workers share similar backgrounds and similar values — including an ugly sense of superiority over those know-nothing rubes out in flyover country. Except, you know, those flyover people do understand things that folks in the bubble don't. Farmers in Kansas know more about farming than DC bureaucrats do, and small-business owners in North Carolina or Nevada know more about their industries than do the bureaucrats at the EPA or the Labor Department. And I suspect that bureaucrats living side by side with those they regulate in North Carolina, or Nevada, or Kansas — sending their kids to local schools, shopping in local markets, eating in local restaurants — won't feel as insulated or superior. Advertisement And that will benefit us all. One of the problems with America's ruling class — beyond its corruption, narrow-mindedness and sheer general incompetence — is its disconnect from, and even contempt for, ordinary Americans. Start your day with all you need to know Morning Report delivers the latest news, videos, photos and more. Thanks for signing up! Enter your email address Please provide a valid email address. By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Never miss a story. Check out more newsletters Columnist James Taranto calls it 'oikophobia,' a Greek term meaning fear or hatred of one's own countrymen. Advertisement Breaking down the insularity is likely to ease that. Consider, too, a federal government with agencies scattered all across the nation is harder to influence. A lobbyist can't just take an Uber from one agency office to another when they're in different time zones, or invite people from multiple offices to the same cocktail party. Dispersing their targets makes life more difficult for the special interests, which can only be a plus. Advertisement Skyrocketing federal spending and unimpressive federal performance is all the proof we need that concentrating the bureaucracy in one metropolitan area hasn't done much for the rest of us. Let's try another approach: Make them live in the country they want to govern. Glenn Harlan Reynolds is a professor of law at the University of Tennessee and founder of the blog.

Harvard in talks with Trump admin to pay up to $500M over campus antisemitism
Harvard in talks with Trump admin to pay up to $500M over campus antisemitism

New York Post

timea few seconds ago

  • New York Post

Harvard in talks with Trump admin to pay up to $500M over campus antisemitism

Harvard University could pay as much as $500M in a deal with the Trump administration following months of tense back-and-forths over billions in stripped federal funding and research grants, two sources familiar with the negotiations told The Post. Last week, Trump said the Ivy League school 'wants to settle' after seeing Columbia's funding restored in exchange for paying a $200 million fine to settle civil rights violations. The administration had clawed back $2.6 billion in federal funding earlier this year, saying the university had discriminated against Jewish faculty, students and staff by not protecting them from antisemitism on campus. The specific terms in the ongoing negotiations were not immediately made clear by either side, nor was a precise timeline given. However Trump said in June that the government could forge a deal with Harvard 'over the next week or so.' Harvard is still pursuing its lawsuit against the administration over the loss of federal research funds, which it claims could lead to damaged careers and the shuttering of labs on the Cambridge, Massachusetts campus. However Education Secretary Linda McMahon both expressed confidence of a future settlement. 'We're hoping that Harvard will come to the table,' McMahon told NewsNation's 'Morning in America' on Thursday. 'We're already seeing other universities that are taking these measures before investigation or before our coming in to talk to them.' This is a developing story. Please check back for more information.

Washington Post fact checker Glenn Kessler takes buyout after nearly 3 decades – and paper has no replacement
Washington Post fact checker Glenn Kessler takes buyout after nearly 3 decades – and paper has no replacement

New York Post

time30 minutes ago

  • New York Post

Washington Post fact checker Glenn Kessler takes buyout after nearly 3 decades – and paper has no replacement

The man behind The Washington Post's 'Pinocchios' is leaving the paper without anyone to fill his shoes. Glenn Kessler, the editor of The Fact Checker, announced Monday he has taken a buyout, ending his lengthy career at the Post. Advertisement 'After more than 27 years at The Washington Post, including almost 15 as The Fact Checker, I will be leaving on July 31, having taken a buyout,' Kessler wrote on his Facebook page. 'Much as I would have liked to keep scrutinizing politicians in Washington, especially in this era, the financial considerations were impossible to dismiss.' Kessler said he wrote or edited more than 3,000 fact checks as editor and chief writer of The Fact Checker. 'When I started in 2011, there were only a handful of fact-checking organizations around the world, and I have been thrilled to watch the movement expand across the globe. So many of these brave and diligent fact checkers have become good friends,' Kessler wrote. 4 Portrait of Glenn Kessler. Washington Post Advertisement 'My fact checks were routinely the most-read articles on The Post's website. I had my detractors, from both the left and right, but many readers appreciated my efforts to sort out the truth in political rhetoric,' he added. Kessler revealed he attempted to stay on a contract basis long enough for his bosses to find a successor for a smooth transition, to no avail. 'I didn't want The Post to have a gap in fact-checking coverage during this fraught period in U.S. history. But we couldn't work out an agreement,' he wrote. 4 Glenn Kessler, the editor of The Fact Checker, announced Monday he has taken a buyout, ending his lengthy career at the Post. Christopher Sadowski Advertisement Washington Post executive editor Matt Murray appeared onboard with hiring a new fact checker in an exchange with Kessler, according to a source familiar with the matter. Kessler's next chapter will involve him writing books, and he's open to freelance and consulting work. 'In 2018, when the Fact Checker team was compiling a database of more than 30,000 Trump claims, I told the New York Times that 'I have the best job in journalism,'' Kessler wrote. 'I still believe that, and I'm sorry to leave without a replacement lined up. But it's the right time for me. I hope The Post finds someone to carry on this important project.' The Washington Post did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital's request for comment. Advertisement 4 Kessler's next chapter will involve him writing books, and he's open to freelance and consulting work. The Washington Post via Getty Images Murray implemented a new round of the paper's Voluntary Separation Program (VSP) in May, hoping that most veteran staffers would be enticed by the exit offer. The program is set to end this week. According to a VSP document previously viewed by Fox News Digital, nine months of base pay would be given to staffers employed for 10-15 years, 12 months of base pay for 15-20-year veterans, 15 months of base pay for 20-25-year veterans and 18 months for anyone who has worked at the Post for more than 25 years. All of them would also receive 12 months of pay credit in their Separate Retirement Account (SRA). Other high-profile writers who've taken the buyouts include columnists Jonathan Capehart, Catherine Rampell, Philip Bump and Joe Davidson. Also fueling the exodus from the editorial pages was the initiative by the Post's billionaire owner Jeff Bezos to promote 'personal liberties and free markets' and vowing not to publish pieces opposing those principles. 4 Other high-profile writers who've taken the buyouts include columnists Jonathan Capehart, Catherine Rampell, Philip Bump and Joe Davidson. Christopher Sadowski Bezos' directive, which was announced in February, led to the immediate resignation of Post opinion editor David Shipley. Others resigned in protest and a mass cancellation of subscriptions by liberal leaders rocked the paper. The paper faced similar backlash last fall when Bezos blocked the paper's endorsement of then-Vice President Kamala Harris shortly before the election. Earlier this month, Washington Post CEO Will Lewis sent a memo to staff issuing an ultimatum for those contemplating adapting to the paper's new direction. Advertisement Also fueling the exodus from the editorial pages was the initiative by the Post's billionaire owner Jeff Bezos to promote 'personal liberties and free markets' and vowing not to publish pieces opposing those principles. Bezos' directive, which was announced in February, led to the immediate resignation of Post opinion editor David Shipley. Others resigned in protest and a mass cancellation of subscriptions by liberal leaders rocked the paper. The paper faced similar backlash last fall when Bezos blocked the paper's endorsement of then-Vice President Kamala Harris shortly before the election. Earlier this month, Washington Post CEO Will Lewis sent a memo to staff issuing an ultimatum for those contemplating adapting to the paper's new direction.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store