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

[SummerMadness]

What private citizens do on Twitter does not apply, thus entertaining the idea of peoplebeing sued for blocking others on Twitter is not applicable. This is about public officials using a medium open to the public.

 

[TerranceL]

What private citizens do on Twitter does not apply, thus entertaining the idea of peoplebeing sued for blocking others on Twitter is not applicable.

This is about a public official using his personal twitter account. You would have a point if he were posting under @POTUS but he wasn't.

This is about public officials using a medium open to the public.

"medium open to the public" is a really odd way of saying, private institutions property.

Also using the line of logic put forth by the judge users banned from twitter have a right to see the president's tweets too. Time to unban those folks who are having their freedom of speech blocked somehow.

 

[Nithavela]

So then how is it that only Trump is in violation and not twitter for having the block option for all of us.

Because twitter and facebook are private companies and not a state agencies.

I think that this ruling should apply for any official or agencies, though. Not just Trump.

 

[Kentonio]

This is about a public official using his personal twitter account. You would have a point if he were posting under @POTUS but he wasn't.

He’s using that account to conduct official business. It’s no longer just a private account while he continues to use it as his official one.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Oh the drama!!!

Nobody is being suppressed.

The judge thought otherwise. We should hold our government to the highest standard when the Constitutional rights of the people are involved... don't you think?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Lack of facts to back up statements duly noted.

If you don't care for the facts and law from the judge, why would you accept them from anyone e else not of Donald?

 

[Hammster]

The judge thought otherwise. We should hold our government to the highest standard when the Constitutional rights of the people are involved... don't you think?

Nobody’s rights are violated.

 

[SummerMadness]

Nobody’s rights are violated.

Keep telling yourself that, your only explanation is that there are other forms of communication. But if one group is restricted to communication via phone while others are restricted to communication via snail mail, that is a violation of their constitutional rights.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Nobody’s rights are violated.

The Judge thought otherwise.

It would seem that any attempt to limit the people's ability to petition the government for a redress of grievances, be it on Twitter or on a street corner, should be held to the highest scrutiny. The judge decided to favor we the people over the authority of the government establishment.

 

[Always in His Presence]

If you don't care for the facts and law from the judge, why would you accept them from anyone e else not of Donald?

The judges statement does not support your assertion. That is clear. So the facts and the judge are not proof for you.

The assertion fails.

 

[TLK Valentine]

It is not, if you infringe on the rights of some citizens to partake in a public forum because they criticize you, a government official, that is an infringement of free speech.

Remember, boys and girls, you're only allowed to participate in a government forum if you agree with the government...
...if you obey the government...
...if you love the government.

Malcontents and boat-rockers need not apply.

 

[Always in His Presence]

Remember, boys and girls, you're only allowed to participate in a government forum if you agree with the government...
...if you obey the government...
...if you love the government.

Malcontents and boat-rockers need not apply.

When did twitter become a government forum?

 

[TLK Valentine]

The judges statement does not support your assertion. That is clear. So the facts and the judge are not proof for you.

The assertion fails.

My assertion is that Donald violated the First Amendment right of the American people.

 

[Hammster]

Keep telling yourself that, your only explanation is that there are other forms of communication. But if one group is restricted to communication via phone while others are restricted to communication via snail mail, that is a violation of their constitutional rights.

No it isn’t.

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.

Nobody is restricting their ability to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

 

[Hammster]

The Judge thought otherwise.

It would seem that any attempt to limit the people's ability to petition the government for a redress of grievances, be it on Twitter or on a street corner, should be held to the highest scrutiny. The judge decided to favor we the people over the authority of the government establishment.

That fact that folks don’t see this as judicial activism is troubling.

 

[TLK Valentine]

When did twitter become a government forum?

When the government used it to promote itself.

You may be shocked to discover who the government's chief executive currently is:

President of the United States - Wikipedia

 

[TLK Valentine]

That fact that folks don’t see this as judicial activism is troubling.

The fact that the "judicial activism" panic button has been pressed isn't surprising.

The facts are:

• There is no shortage of people who wish to exercise their first amendment rights to air their grievances to the government
• To the surprise of absolutely nobody, our current government's leadership doesn't want to hear it.
• To that end, the government took steps (tiny steps, to be sure, but steps nonetheless) to block these people from airing their grievances -- only those who support the government were allowed to participate.
• The judge determined that such actions, small as they may be, were in violation of the First Amendment, which, indeed, explicitly prohibits the government from abridging the freedom of speech.

So... where exactly is the activism?

 

[TLK Valentine]

The judge is tech illiterate.

All one has to do to see Trumps posts is log out. It's not rocket science.

And when the newspapers get shut down, all one has to do is turn on the TV.

The judge claims that twitter is a public forum, it's not it's a private entity just like this forum.

A private entity being used by the government to conduct government business. When Uncle Sam gives you a bat and a big leather glove, it's safe to assume you're playing ball with him.

 

[Hammster]

The fact that the "judicial activism" panic button has been pressed isn't surprising.

The facts are:

• There is no shortage of people who wish to exercise their first amendment rights to air their grievances to the government
• To the surprise of absolutely nobody, our current government's leadership doesn't want to hear it.
• To that end, the government took steps (tiny steps, to be sure, but steps nonetheless) to block these people from airing their grievances -- only those who support the government were allowed to participate.
• The judge determined that such actions, small as they may be, were in violation of the First Amendment, which, indeed, explicitly prohibits the government from abridging the freedom of speech.

So... where exactly is the activism?

If you can’t see it...

 

[TLK Valentine]

If you can’t see it...

...it's not there. Thank you for proving my point.