So does the President have the right to block people from his twitter.

[Belk]

Well, the DoD, for one, has officially declared that they ignore Trump's tweets.

Which the DOD is free to do. That does not mean that Trump is not using his Twitter in an official capacity.

 

[RDKirk]

Which the DOD is free to do. That does not mean that Trump is not using his Twitter in an official capacity.

If government officials don't regard it as official, then it's not official. I don't recall the Executive Branch ever taking as policy anything Trump has only tweeted.

 

[Belk]

I think some people are making broad assumptions about "government guidelines regarding communication" that aren't necessarily what they think they are.

I admit this is not my area of expertise, but as a government technology professional involved in communication I am not completely ignorant either. Nor is this simply my own personal opinion.

Can President Trump block people on Twitter? - National Constitution Center

 

[Belk]

If government officials don't regard it as official, then it's not official. I don't recall the Executive Branch ever taking as policy anything Trump has only tweeted.

That is not correct. Simply because one section of government does not TREAT it as official is not the determining factor. The factors determining official communication are much more nuanced then that.

 

[Goonie]

If government officials don't regard it as official, then it's not official. I don't recall the Executive Branch ever taking as policy anything Trump has only tweeted.

To quote former press secretary Sean Spicer “They’re considered official statements by the president of the United States.”

 

[super animator]

It’s not his property, it’s Twitters.

That statement is meaningful as "that is not your account, it's CFs". There a good amount of autonomy given here.

 

[super animator]

And more importantly if you use your private account to make official presidential statements you are defacto making your account public and subject to the constitution.

How do you determine that it's an official presidential statement? Does everything come out of his mouth is official by default?

 

[Goonie]

How do you determine that it's an official presidential statement? Does everything come out of his mouth is official by default?

Ask Sean spicer.

 

[super animator]

Ask Sean spicer.

I asking you not Sean spicer.

 

[Goonie]

I asking you not Sean spicer.

former press secretary Sean Spicer said of the tweets: “They’re considered official statements by the president of the United States.”

He’s far more qualified to say.

 

[super animator]

former press secretary Sean Spicer said of the tweets: “They’re considered official statements by the president of the United States.”

He’s far more qualified to say.

again I am asking you not Sean spicer.

 

[RDKirk]

To quote former press secretary Sean Spicer “They’re considered official statements by the president of the United States.”

He doesn't have that job anymore, does he. And for sure, not everything he said while in it was factual.

 

[Goonie]

He doesn't have that job anymore, does he. And for sure, not everything he said while in it was factual.

Traditionally anything the President says is regarded as US policy. Are you saying tweeting is not a form of communication?

 

[RDKirk]

I admit this is not my area of expertise, but as a government technology professional involved in communication I am not completely ignorant either. Nor is this simply my own personal opinion.

Can President Trump block people on Twitter? - National Constitution Center

The term “forum” is a special one in constitutional law and First Amendment doctrine. It refers to the proverbial “public forum,” which scholar Erwin Chemerinsky defines as “government-owned properties that the government is constitutionally obligated to make available for speech.” Two classic examples are sidewalks and parks – traditionally public spaces that may be restricted only under very special circumstances.

The Knight Institute contends that @realDonaldTrump and @POTUS are “designated public forums,” spaces that can be closed to speech but are voluntarily made available to the public by the government for expressive activity.

Those two paragraphs are directly conflicting.

If "public forum" is defined as “government-owned properties that the government is constitutionally obligated to make available for speech," then Twitter is most definitely not a "public forum."

Such spaces enjoy the same protections as traditional public forums – including a requirement that any regulations be “content-neutral” and not discriminate based on the viewpoint of a speaker. The Knight Institute says that’s exactly what happened to their clients.

This assertion is made without a single sentence of support...and it's not true. That article does not support what you think it does, ending with rebuttals to that point.

 

[RDKirk]

Traditionally anything the President says is regarded as US policy.

Not true. Every president has made his own off-the-cuff statements that have not been regarded public policy. Carter: "I'll kick his ass" Reagan: "Let the bombing begin." Theodore Roosevelt: "Labor must organize."

 

[Kentonio]

That statement is meaningful as "that is not your account, it's CFs". There a good amount of autonomy given here.

You were the one who brought up property to try and link this to the government seizing private property. I simply pointed out you were wrong.

 

[HannahT]

I can't believe people have this kind of time of their hands that they would use their own money to file a lawsuit over twitter? If you MUST send your message to him send a letter. Heck, they would email available too. They also can do their thing on the POTUS account too.

This makes no sense to me.

 

[Belk]

Those two paragraphs are directly conflicting.

If "public forum" is defined as “government-owned properties that the government is constitutionally obligated to make available for speech," then Twitter is most definitely not a "public forum."

Is a government twitter account not "government owned property"? Not twitter itself but the account. I believe that is the argument they are putting forward.

This assertion is made without a single sentence of support...and it's not true. That article does not support what you think it does, ending with rebuttals to that point.

The article supports that it is not simply my opinion that they might have a valid case. That was my purpose for linking it. You might not agree with their opinion but, as I said, this whole thing hinges on some decisions that are not very clear cut.

 

[HannahT]

Is a government twitter account not "government owned property"? Not twitter itself but the account. I believe that is the argument they are putting forward.

I guess I'm confused. They have two twitter accounts for the man. One setup by the government, and one that was not. Did the government seize his personal one? I would assume that would be part of the argument as well no?

 

[Goonie]

I guess I'm confused. They have two twitter accounts for the man. One setup by the government, and one that was not. Did the government seize his personal one? I would assume that would be part of the argument as well no?

The argument is that he has commingled his personal and govt accounts by making policy statements on his personal account.