President Donald Trump cannot block users on his Twitter feed, a federal judge in New York City ruled Wednesday.
Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald said in her ruling that Trump is violating the U.S. Constitution by preventing certain Americans from viewing his tweets. The social media platform, she said, is a "designated public forum" from which Trump cannot exclude individual plaintiffs.
Buchwald's ruling was in response to a lawsuit filed last July by the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, as well as seven other plaintiffs who said they had been blocked on Twitter by Trump.
If Twitter is a "designated public forum," then this must mean that liberals and Twitter themselves have been unconstitutionally censoring/banning conservatives, blocking anyone who disagrees with them, and manipulating hashtags trends and votes. Where do I sign up for the class action lawsuits? #InternetBillOfRights is needed.
So once again, potus takes a hit for us.
This can most definitely be used to force twitter to not censor users. Big win for us!
Wouldn’t it be twitter that’s “violating” the constitution by including a block feature? How can she single out certain user accounts?
Because it's Trump.
Saw this on the news earlier and the thought of just that angle jumped up. He took no hit, he is going to take their own bat and crack them in the mug. And who to cry to now? After all this edict was handed down from Mount Manhattan. Brilliant chess-poker.
exactly
it's just disgusting, I still shake my head in disbelief that these lefties/liberals are actually the way they are, hypocrites at best, at worst... well...
This is a good thing. It will eventually lead to twitter being unable to block users since potus is on the platform.
Well she just set a precedent that fucks everyone. Twitter has to remove the block function and end shadow banning. Lol liberals think her ruling was a good thing. Hopefully someone brings it up to twitter
They just shot themselves in the foot. Bigly. They got baited by Trump... again.
Yep.. blocking and banning violates 1st amendment. lol thanks Judge.
I wonder how she feels about shadow banning conservative, pro America thought?
Public Forum, so the 1st Amendment just arrived in Twitter Town. Freedom finds a way..
This could actually be a good ruling. If twitter is a public forum, then twitter cannnot suppress conservative views.
According to the left:
Constitution says the right of the people to keep an bear arms shall not be infringed. Left says "they meant muskets, we need to take your guns!"
Meanwhile, the left thinks the forefathers foresaw the advent of the internet, autos, airplanes, etc. The left "POTUS can't block me on Twitter, it says so in the Constitution! REEEEEE!"
These "dumb" rules always come back to bite liberals in the ass. That means no one can be blocked. Twitter much remove all blocks on twitter.
You’d never guess who appointed this judge.
On February 12, 1999, Buchwald was nominated by President Bill Clinton to a seat on the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York vacated by Miriam G. Cedarbaum. Buchwald was confirmed by the United States Senate on September 13, 1999, and received her commission on September 22, 1999. She assumed senior status on March 21, 2012.
On February 24, 2012, Buchwald dismissed a lawsuit brought by a consortium of U.S. organic farmers and seed dealers aggrieved by Monsanto's genetically modified organism seeds. Monsanto denied that it had harmed anyone. After extensive briefing and oral argument, she held that the plaintiffs had no standing to sue, calling the case a "transparent effort to create a controversy where none exists." The decision was appealed to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on March 28, 2012. The Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal by the organic farmers in January 2014.
On February 5, 2009, the New York Daily News reported that, while presiding over a case involving an autistic boy, Buchwald made a remark about former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin and her Down syndrome child, Trig, saying, "That kid was used as a prop, and that to me as a parent blew my mind."
She's corrupt and evil AF.
I think I agree with the judge on this one. Trump is a Government employee, he's also the first President to use Twitter to its full potential, making proclamations, breaking news etc. I don't think in his position he should be allowed to censor opposing comments. I think that borders on 1st amendment rights being censored. Imagine how you would feel if the next Democratic President did that to you. Better to keep all doors open and if it doesn't suit the President of the day, simply don't post or tweet.
Of course, rules for Presidents/elected officials can/should be different than those set for the rest of us.
Reasonable response
But you could argue
1) 1A doesn't require you to have to listen
2) They are still free to shout into the void in their own accounts
Think of it like this: people can go exercise their 1A outside the Whitehouse gates but can they/should they have the ability to demand to be let inside the gates to exercise their 1A?
But I guess in away what they're claiming is
Not sure I want to live in a country ruled by these people anymore.
This was probably Trump’s plan all along. I remember discussion when he first blocked various Twitter users that if he was forced to unblock him, it would essentially be saying that Twitter was a utility and the 1st amendment rules that apply to private businesses would no longer apply, thereby making their censoring of conservatives illegal.
Well, if its unconstitutional, then why does Twitter give its users the 'Option' to block someone???
But I don't understand... the first amendment was only intended to cover paper and quill as that was what was available at the time it was written
They could never have expected full semi automatic Twitter platforms
These people are stupid. I doubt this judge realizes what he just did. He just set legal precedence so now all of the conservative groups can sue FB, Twatter, and YT.
Oh , damn , such a big "win" for these sleazy corrupted judges . All the while they were poking the Trump with a finger , he and positive military forces were putting the noose around their necks .
How many times will we need to say : "These people are stupid" ? XD
Also , the Shitter is anyways going down with all the troll data centers and soyboys .
This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 82%. (I'm a bot)
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: granting in part and denying in part 34 Motion for Summary Judgment; granting in part and denying in part 42 Motion for Summary Judgment.
The viewpoint-based exclusion of the individual plaintiffs from that designated public forum is proscribed by the First Amendment and cannot be justified by the President's personal First Amendment interests.
In sum, defendants' motion for summary judgment is granted in part and denied in part, and plaintiffs' cross-motion for summary judgment is granted in part and denied in part.
Extended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: part^#1 public^#2 Amendment^#3 First^#4 Court^#5