Law Trump can't block Twitter followers, federal judge says

  • Thread starter Deleted member 391673
  • Start date
D

Deleted member 391673

Guest
Just saw this on CNBC

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/23/trump-cant-block-twitter-followers-federal-judge-says.html

"President Donald Trump cannot block users on his Twitter feed, a New York federal judge ruled Wednesday.

The judge, Naomi Reice Buchwald, ruled that Trump is violating the U.S. Constitution by preventing Americans from viewing his tweets.

The suit was filed in July 2017 by the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University.

"This case requires us to consider whether a public official may, consistent with the First Amendment, 'block' a person from his Twitter account in response to the political views that person has expressed, and whether the analysis differs because that public official is the President of the United States," the judge said in her opinion. "The answer to both questions is no." "

---------------

Now this seems rather odd to me, especially the reasoning.

I could see blocking being unconstitutional because it takes away the ability of a twitter user from exercising their right of speech since they cannot directly reply to a public officials statement,

But the quote I posted seems to say that it is unconstitutional because it prevents a user from viewing a twitter post. But this can't be right since even if your account is blocked on twitter, you can still access the account if you're logged out, right?

I can understand if it said a public official cannot make a private account and be exclusive as to who they decide to allow access, and I can understand if the ruling claimed that blocking a user takes away their ability to comment, but that doesn't seem the case.

Thoughts?
 
Is it protected speech if I DM the prez doodie pics of the bowl before I flush?
 
The President's Twitter statements are official public statements fwiw.
 
What a time to be alive
 
Wow . . . what a time to be alive!

Anyone who blocks me (I'm talking to to Shannon Watts) I just log out or view in another browser.
 
I think what the President should do is block Naomi Reice Buchwald, sit back and enjoy the shit show.

bork1}
 
Just saw this on CNBC

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/23/trump-cant-block-twitter-followers-federal-judge-says.html

"President Donald Trump cannot block users on his Twitter feed, a New York federal judge ruled Wednesday.

The judge, Naomi Reice Buchwald, ruled that Trump is violating the U.S. Constitution by preventing Americans from viewing his tweets.

The suit was filed in July 2017 by the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University.

"This case requires us to consider whether a public official may, consistent with the First Amendment, 'block' a person from his Twitter account in response to the political views that person has expressed, and whether the analysis differs because that public official is the President of the United States," the judge said in her opinion. "The answer to both questions is no." "

---------------

Now this seems rather odd to me, especially the reasoning.

I could see blocking being unconstitutional because it takes away the ability of a twitter user from exercising their right of speech since they cannot directly reply to a public officials statement,

But the quote I posted seems to say that it is unconstitutional because it prevents a user from viewing a twitter post. But this can't be right since even if your account is blocked on twitter, you can still access the account if you're logged out, right?

I can understand if it said a public official cannot make a private account and be exclusive as to who they decide to allow access, and I can understand if the ruling claimed that blocking a user takes away their ability to comment, but that doesn't seem the case.

Thoughts?

Even if it doesn't remove a persons ability to read the tweets entirely, I suppose you could argue it's still creating a limitation.
 
The President's Twitter statements are official public statements fwiw.

true, but they still remain public even if a user-account is blocked. that's why it's a bit odd.
 
Even if it doesn't remove a persons ability to read the tweets entirely, I suppose you could argue it's still creating a limitation.

i suppose,
but the limitation is what? logging out? or not having to log in?

on the air, cnbc mentioned something about Ellon Musk and whether he will be allowed to block users, so it does pose some interesting questions.

if this applies to public officials will it eventually apply to public figures like Musk? or any celebrity for that matter?
 
I think what the President should do is block Naomi Reice Buchwald, sit back and enjoy the shit show.

bork1}

> never heard of her before this thread
> google image search

wood not
 
If you ever wanted to know what it be like to have a 14 year old girl in the white house... You got it
 
Now this seems rather odd to me, especially the reasoning.

I could see blocking being unconstitutional because it takes away the ability of a twitter user from exercising their right of speech since they cannot directly reply to a public officials statement,

But the quote I posted seems to say that it is unconstitutional because it prevents a user from viewing a twitter post. But this can't be right since even if your account is blocked on twitter, you can still access the account if you're logged out, right?

I can understand if it said a public official cannot make a private account and be exclusive as to who they decide to allow access, and I can understand if the ruling claimed that blocking a user takes away their ability to comment, but that doesn't seem the case.

Thoughts?

It makes sense to me. The POTUS isn't blocking his account. He's blocking his account from specific Americans. And the only way he knows which specific Americans is through their Twitter handle. Logging out of Twitter to see his post is like being invited to a party...as long as you don't enter the building and only watch through a window.

It appears that the judge is saying that the POTUS can't shut out people from the public forum under any circumstance, even if there's a workaround. It doesn't matter what you're going to do, you have to be allowed to see the government's actions from within the public forum itself.
 
If you ever wanted to know what it be like to have a 14 year old girl in the white house... You got it

Wait, he's on Snapchat and Instagram too?
 
Fuck America .... there must be a better use for the court system
 
Back
Top