On Friday, conservative journalist Susan Dyer Reynolds and San Francisco Supervisor Dean Preston settled their differences — in court, at least.
Their dispute began four years ago, when Preston, who represents District 5, blocked Reynolds on Twitter, after alleging that she had threatened his family in a tweet. Reynolds sued him in Dec. 2022, two years after getting blocked, arguing the block constituted a violation of her constitutional right to free speech, and prevented her from accessing a “designated public forum,” since the supervisor used his account to debate legislation and policies.
The lawsuit became something of a spectacle for San Francisco’s political class, featuring a leftist politician and a woman who, in her current role as editorial director of The Voice of San Francisco, once referred to Preston as San Francisco’s “Democratic Socialist kingpin.” Preston unblocked Reynolds a few weeks after the complaint was filed, but she continued to pursue the lawsuit, even after he left the platform entirely in 2023.
The parties have now settled the dispute, with both sides paying their own attorneys' fees and costs.
“This is a complete victory and Reynolds' frivolous lawsuit against me is now history," Preston said in a statement to Gazetteer SF.
Neither side paid any money to the other as part of the settlement, Preston spokesperson Melissa Hernandez said.
“We achieved an important objective of our case when Preston unblocked Susan in response to litigation,” Reynolds' lawyer, Jesse Franklin-Murdock, said in a statement. He declined to give further details about the agreement.
The City Attorney's office, which represented Preston in the suit, said it is “pleased that we were able to reach an agreement to dismiss this lawsuit.”
Reynolds had initially sued for damages, as well as a court order prohibiting Preston from blocking her on social media accounts. In March, the Supreme Court ruled on a similar case, creating a precedent that meant any prohibition would only apply to accounts he controlled in his official capacity as Supervisor.
Figuring out under what role he was acting under, in which social media posts, would’ve likely required a lot more litigation, something both sides probably had little appetite for.
Last year, a judge rejected Preston’s request to have the case thrown out, but blocked Reynolds from the possibility of monetary damages. Preston appealed the decision to the San Francisco-based Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which allowed the case to continue, but agreed with the lower court that Preston can’t be held liable for monetary damages, significantly reducing Reynolds’ incentive to continue fighting.
“There is no present dispute regarding Preston’s X account, so there is no need for the case to continue,” Franklin-Murdock told Gazetteer SF.
Editor's note: This story was updated on Aug. 23 at 4:12 p.m. to include comments from the City Attorney's Office.
