Posted on 05/23/2018 8:05:33 PM PDT by Trump20162020
President Trump's decision to block his Twitter followers for their political views is a violation of the First Amendment, a federal judge ruled Wednesday, saying that Trump's effort to silence his critics is not permissible because the digital space in which he engages with constituents is a public forum.
The ruling rejects administration arguments that the First Amendment does not apply to Trump in this case because he was acting as a private individual. In a 75-page decision, Judge Naomi Buchwald said Trump, as a federal official, is not exempt from constitutional obligations to refrain from "viewpoint discrimination."
"No government official — including the President — is above the law," wrote Buchwald for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
Noah Feldman, a Harvard law professor, said he thinks the case was wrongly decided and expects it to be reversed. For a public forum to exist, the government has to own or control it, he said, but in this case, Twitter also controls Trump's account.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
The judge is a "bitter clinger"
LOL -- That would end REALLY well for Twitter. [/s]
(And that's w/o the President lifting a finger; just the outrage of their users directed at them.)
The implications of this are incredible. I have to think that Twitter, YouTube, Facebook, will not like this decision. Since it warms says that there is First Amendment protection, and two, that Comments are protected. I presumed then, you too can I remove guns, conservatives cannot be restricted.
The judge in the Trump case is uniquely bad. I don't think her ruling will stand appeal.
So this means shadowbanning conservatives is a no no?
Ah yes, another ruling pulled out of a leftist judge’s a**.
Exactly...
That gives us license to destroy Twitter. Follow every ‘rat you can. Obnoxiously oppose everything they say. If hey block you, sue.
Judge needs to be robo twitter spammed. Do it to all of the judges social accounts.
This is the goal of those Trump blocked. Many were robo spam.
There is no law saying left wing tards have the right to essentially impede communication of all who are not lefttards.
This is simply an attempt to shut down Trumps Twitter communication.
#5. Your comment got garbled in transmission.
You wrote “Twitter blocking is obviously a high crime and misdemeanor”.
I think you meant to write “Twitter blocking was long time overdue but Trump showed a timely demeanor when it was done”.
As for the judge, another leftist “twit” who knows nothing about “twitting”.
The implications of this are incredible.
I think one implication is the a person can reply to Trump’s tweets with porn. Trump can’t block him.
And that implies that if Trump gives a speech and a heckler shows porn, the heckler can’t be ejected.
If someone picked it up the judge would have to give up her online presence.
how come there is ANOTHER VERSION of this story by the same writer, Brian Fung? different url too. someone needs to compare the two. definitely not the same.
23 May: WaPo: No, Twitter still isn’t subject to the First Amendment — even if a judge said Trump’s account is
by Brian Fung; Staff writer Hamza Shaban contributed to this report
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2018/05/23/no-twitter-still-doesnt-have-to-abide-by-the-first-amendment-even-if-trump-does/?utm_term=.0644dbe207cb
One of the best things about Trump becoming president is that he has helped expose just how nutty and out of touch with reality the liberals are to those who profess to be in the middle. They really want to be any part of these nuts?
Two things: (1) If the court’s decision is 75 pages long, there’s a whole lot of rationalizing and making-stuff-up going on, and (2) this holding is a very short step from calling Twitter a “public utility.” Leftists like this boneheaded judge never, ever think about the consequences of their actions.
B-O-L-O-G-N-A
Can you translate that into English please?
Nay Omi sounds like she might be a little fruit loops. Does this mean you violate the Constitution every time you “unfriend” someone on Facebook?
Wait, what’s the use of a block feature again then?! /s
The judge also ruled that Trump violated the constitution when he ate a cheeseburger without consuming the entire bun.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.