Trump Violates First Amendment by Blocking Twitter Users From Feed, Judge Says

[SummerMadness]

Trump Violates First Amendment by Blocking Twitter Users From Feed, Judge Says

President Trump’s practice of blocking Twitter users who are critical of him from seeing his posts on the social media platform violates the First Amendment, a federal judge in Manhattan ruled on Wednesday.

The ruling came in a case brought by seven Twitter users who had been blocked by the @realDonaldTrump account after they criticized the president.

 

[Rion]

And then Donny discovers the Mute option and nothing changes.

 

[NightHawkeye]

Trump Violates First Amendment by Blocking Twitter Users From Feed, Judge Says

... thus giving renewed meaning to the phrase 'Judicial Activism'.

 

[Hammster]

 

[Rion]

Lefties hate Trump's Twitter use. They can only respond with insults and profanities on Twitter.

Like I said, he can just use Mute. He'll never see their posts, and they'll never realize they're screaming into the wind.

 

[Always in His Presence]

When thec1st Amendment was written the only methods of free speech were the spoken and written word.

Therefore, using the Muskets only argument for the second amendment, it can possibly be a violation.

 

[AirPo]

When thec1st Amendment was written the only methods of free speech were the spoken and written word.

Therefore, using the Muskets only argument for the second amendment, it can possibly be a violation.

Twitter is writing.

 

[USincognito]

Trump isn't a fan of the First Amendment.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

And before anyone's predictable riposte, I mean the principle of the petition clause.

 

[Always in His Presence]

Twitter is writing.

An AR15 is a gun that shoots.

 

[AirPo]

An AR15 is a gun that shoots.

Writing existing in 1791, AR15s didn't.

 

[Always in His Presence]

Writing existing in 1791, AR15s didn't.

And neither did digital communications. It’s not writing, it is digital communication that is sent globally in an instant.

 

[super animator]

Is it a violation of the first amendment if you ignore them?

 

[Hammster]

Twitter is writing.

So is email. And they can do that.

 

[Always in His Presence]

Is it a violation of the first amendment if you ignore them?

Nope, because access to the medium is still open, they just can’t do it on your threads.

Like saying he is denying someone’s right to free speech because he will not let them stand in his living room and yell obscenities at him.

 

[AirPo]

And neither did digital communications. It’s not writing, it is digital communication that is sent globally in an instant.

Speech is communication. The method of delivery is not relevant.

 

[AirPo]

So is email. And they can do that.

Who can?

 

[AirPo]

Nope, because access to the medium is still open, they just can’t do it on your threads.

Like saying he is denying someone’s right to free speech because he will not let them stand in his living room and yell obscenities at him.

No it's not.

 

[Always in His Presence]

Speech is communication. The method of delivery is not relevant.

Weapons use projectiles. Method of delivery is not relevant

No it's not.

Yes it is.

 

[Hammster]

Who can?

Anyone that wants to respond to the President’s tweets. The White House has an email address.

 

[AirPo]

Weapons use projectiles. Method of delivery is not relevant



Yes it is.

Projectiles are not mentioned in the first amendment.