New case law suggests social media accounts created by public officials may be considered public forums subject to constitutional scrutiny under the First Amendment.

In Shurtleff v. City of Boston (2022) 142 S.Ct. 1583 (Shurtleff), the United States Supreme Court, for the first time, addressed a topic that presents a common and growing issue for public agencies related to the intersection between government versus private speech.

On March 4, 2022, Governor Gavin Newsom issued Executive Order N-6-22 in response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

On May 26, 2022, the California Attorney General (AG) issued Opinion No. 21-1102, addressing certain aspects of "closed session" attendance under the Ralph M. Brown Act.

On May 19, 2022, the California Attorney General (AG) published Opinion No. 14-202, stating that premium generated from the sale of school district general obligation bonds cannot be used for any purpose other than to pay debt service on the bonds.

In its recent holding in City of Austin, Texas v. Reagan National Advertising of Austin, LLC (U.S., Apr. 21, 2022, No. 20-1029), The United States Supreme Court upheld the right of public agencies to regulate on-premises and off-premises signs differently.

On March 24, 2022, the United States Supreme Court decided a case relevant to public agency governing boards managing disruptive board members. The case was originally brought by David Wilson, an elected trustee on the Houston Community College Board.

In B.D. v. Blizzard Entertainment, Inc. (Mar. 29, 2022, No. D078506)    Cal.App.5th    , the California Court of Appeal held that a pop-up license agreement used for an online videogame provided adequate notice to users that they would be bound by its terms, including a requirement for binding arbitration.