[DoodleBob]

I'm against embracing a bad decision just because we might be able to twist it to our advantage.

Bravo.

First, we must be wary of a ruling from a Clinton appointee who also sided with Monsanto against organic farmers. I wouldn't be surprised to see this judge's phone logs replete with calls from Madame Loser, and texts with this picture:

Second, if the tables were reversed and the government ruled Breitbart's comments section - or Freerepublic - were public property, we'd be howling. This is an egregious and stunning overreach - legislating from the bench in the first degree.

Yea, the Founders didn't have the interweb but they knew the power of the press...as such they didn't put an asterisk on the First Amendment for this sort of thing. The Justice Dept's argument that since Twitter is a public company, it is beyond the reach of First Amendment public forum rules should have carried the day.

We may dislike FB and the statist leanings of Silicon Valley, but you're either for or against private property. This is a shameful ruling and Deplorables should be bashing this ruling on the basis of fundamentals. To see many good people cheering a ruling from a Clinton appointee is odd.

[Bryanw92]

>>but you’re either for or against private property

In cyberspace, you simply cannot use the simplistic rules of private property that apply to tangible items and dirt. FB, Twitter, etc declare that all material posted on their site becomes their property and they can use it for whatever they want.

Using traditional private property rules, that’s like Wal-mart declaring that any vehicle parked in their lot belongs to Wal-mart and can be moved, looted, modified in anyway that Wal-mart decides because “you read the 80 page EULA that we posted inside the store, right?”

Cyberspace needs its own set of property rules that uniquely address all the special situations that exist in cyberspace and do not exist in the real world. Trying to adapt brick and mortar rules is impossible unless they are applied unfairly. This is what is happening here.

[Svartalfiar]

Second, if the tables were reversed and the government ruled Breitbart's comments section - or Freerepublic - were public property, we'd be howling. This is an egregious and stunning overreach - legislating from the bench in the first degree.

I don't think this ruling is Twitter per se - it's Trump's Twitter account. It says that Trump, in his personal account (not a gov account for POTUS), can't block anyone. It's a complete bullshit ruling violating his personal side.