A federal appeals court has just recently upheld a lower court’s decision on ‘banning’ Trump form blocking people on his personal Twitter account, the court also ruled that Trump’s blocking people is a ‘violation of their first amendment rights’.
According the judge the in the case Trump’s personal twitter account is an “interactive public form”
The ruling was one of the highest-profile court decisions yet in a growing constellation of cases addressing what the First Amendment means in a time when political expression increasingly takes place online. It is also a time, Judge Barrington D. Parker wrote, when government conduct is subject to a “wide-open, robust debate” that “generates a level of passion and intensity the likes of which have rarely been seen.”
The First Amendment prohibits an official who uses a social media account for government purposes from excluding people from an “otherwise open online dialogue” because they say things that the official finds objectionable, Judge Parker wrote.
“This debate, as uncomfortable and as unpleasant as it frequently may be, is nonetheless a good thing,” the judge wrote. “In resolving this appeal, we remind the litigants and the public that if the First Amendment means anything, it means that the best response to disfavored speech on matters of public concern is more speech, not less.”
Although, I was hoping the court would strike down the lower court’s ruling In this ridiculous case, seeing the absurdity of liberals trying to control how the President uses his own personal twitter account.
I believe this ruling could actually backfire on liberals and be a good thing for people who are being censored, blocked from social media entirely. Think about it this way if Trump’s personal twitter account is an “interactive public form” and “open online dialogue”, what then what does that make Twitter itself? It makes twitter itself an “interactive public form” and “open online dialogue”.
Liberals constantly tell us that since Twitter Band Big Tech platforms are ‘private companies’, they can do whatever they want and band whoever they want”, however with this court ruling brought on by liberals, could actually benefit conservative and anyone who has ha their account taken down, been banned, or censored from online platforms. Because you can’t have it both ways, one part of the platform (someone’s personal twitter) can’t be a “interactive public form” and “open online dialog” and not the whole platform itself. Either Twitter itself is a “interactive public form” and “open online dialog” or its a private business.
Also, this ruling by the court is sure going to have some side effects, effecting certain democrat politicians, like Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio Cortez who’s also been known to block her critics from interacting with her on her official government account.
There are currently two lawsuits against the Congresswoman from people who have accused her of blocking them after they responded to one of her post.
Republican candidate for Congress Joseph Saladino filed a lawsuit against Ocasio-Cortez on a July 9thYouTube Video and posted the filing on his Twitter account, another lawsuit against the Congresswoman was filed by Dov Hikind the founder of Americans Against Anti-Semtism.
Hikind’s lawsuit states “in an effort to suppress contrary views, Defendant has excluded Twitter uses who have criticized AOC and her positions as a Congresswoman via “blocking,” the lawsuit states. “This practice is unconstitutional and must end”.
Hkind’s lawsuit also mentioned other people on Twitter who have been blocked by the Congresswoman after they criticized her. One America News’ Elizabeth “Liz” Wheeler, who hosts the “Tipping Point” program on One America News Network, Jewish journalist Harry Cherry, Daily Wire reporter Ryan Savedra and political group “Students for Trump”, have all been blocked by Ocasio-Cortez, according to the lawsuit.
Trump’s attorneys had argued that his Twitter account is a personal one. The court wasn’t convinced, writing in the opinion that the account’s landing page bears ”all the trapping of an official state run account.”
So wouldn’t Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’ account’s landing page also bear “all the trappings of an official state run account”?
Think about it this way, if Trump’s personal Twitter is an “interactive public form” and “open online dialog”, then wouldn’t that also make Twitter itself an “interactive public form” and “open online dialog? If that’s the case Twitter itself is actively violating the first amendment rights of thousands of millions of people when they censor them by suspending them, banning them, blocking them from the entire platform.