Federal judge rules Trump can't block people on Twitter because it violates their First Amendment ri

[Harpy Eagle]

Actually Bill Clinton appointed her in 1999. In 2012 she received senior status.

Under Obama. She's obviously a Trump hating leftwing nitwit.

Yes, under Obama...but it is not an appointment it is semi-retirement system for judges.

Everybody that does not lick the ass of Trump is a Trump hating leftwing nitwit in your world, so it is sort of a meaningless charge

Do you have to work at being an unmitigated prick or does it just come naturally for you? How did you ever get such an inflated opinion of yourself? It was a stupid ruling by a partisan judge, why don't you just man up and admit that?

You do not know the first ting about the judge other than who appointed her, and you were probably wrong about that till I corrected the post above.

I am not sold that it was a stupid ruling given that Trumps’s tweets are official statements. That changes things.

Oh, and it just comes naturally.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

She is a Leftwing Judge appointed by a leftwing Prez, you're not very good at this. You also are lacking in Constitutional knowledge son. They are not "official statements" they are from his PERSONAL twitter account.

Bill Clinton was not really that far left, in fact many of the Repubs in office today are further left than he was while in office.

According to both the Press Sec of the POTUS and the DOJ, they are official statements. The links backing that up were given multiple times in this thread.

You are not very good at being a dick, but the fact you are always wrong makes it hard for you to succeed at it.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Federal judge rules Trump can't block people on Twitter because it violates their First Amendment rights

A federal judge on Wednesday ruled President Donald Trump can't block people on Twitter, because it violates their First Amendment rights.

In her decision, US District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald wrote, "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 answer to both questions is no."

Now, this is an anti-Trump ruling I can get behind.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Beware the law of unintended consequences.

WHOOPS! Judge's ruling on Donald Trump's Twitter account could open up a YUGE can of worms

Twitter

1. If this stands, it may be a much bigger problem for Twitter than for Trump. Seems the judge just deemed Twitter a public utility
   
   2 replies10 retweets42 likes
   

KiTA‏ @eldarmark
Replying to @Kevin_D_Jones @Moj_kobe
Correction: Any social media that a government employee or agency uses. Facebook. Instagram. Imgur. Reddit. None of them can moderate their sites if it's an American user.

The ruling was not as much about Twitter as it was the nature of the tweets themselves. They are Official White House statements and thus have to be available to everyone


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

So how can it be available to everyone if twitter is allowed to ban certain people?

Good question.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

I really think the Judge didn't think this through.

Some on the right are already pestering progressive politicians that had them blocked to unblock them.

And who is going to force Trump's IT people to unblock everyone? Can Twitter override that? Will Twitter now override that for all public figures?

From what I have heard Twitter can and already has overridden his account and unblocked his blocked list. According to our local news.

Diamond and Silk are a danger to society and Republicans can't block trolls legally.

Isn't liberal control cool?

 

[sparky]

Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to 'Tweet' and remove all doubt

~S~

 

[martybegan]

Beware the law of unintended consequences.

WHOOPS! Judge's ruling on Donald Trump's Twitter account could open up a YUGE can of worms

Twitter

The ruling was not as much about Twitter as it was the nature of the tweets themselves. They are Official White House statements and thus have to be available to everyone


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

So how can it be available to everyone if twitter is allowed to ban certain people?

Good question.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

me thinks she just set precedence she may not have wanted to. That means facebook, twitter youtube can't block anyone in the event a public announcement comes out. uh oh.

facebook, twitter youtube are not govemrental agencies or individuals

Doesn;t matter. she just declared them public forums, and said people have the right to reply and respond to posts by government actors.

So if facebook bans a person, they are restricting that person's right to respond to government officials.

 

[martybegan]

Beware the law of unintended consequences.

WHOOPS! Judge's ruling on Donald Trump's Twitter account could open up a YUGE can of worms

Twitter

The ruling was not as much about Twitter as it was the nature of the tweets themselves. They are Official White House statements and thus have to be available to everyone


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

So how can it be available to everyone if twitter is allowed to ban certain people?

Good question.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

I really think the Judge didn't think this through.

Some on the right are already pestering progressive politicians that had them blocked to unblock them.

And who is going to force Trump's IT people to unblock everyone? Can Twitter override that? Will Twitter now override that for all public figures?

From what I have heard Twitter can and already has overridden his account and unblocked his blocked list. According to our local news.

Diamond and Silk are a danger to society and Republicans can't block trolls legally.

Isn't liberal control cool?

Now are they going to override the blocks for all government officials?

Also anyone banned by twitter should now claim their 1st amendment rights are being infringed by being unable to respond to the President's tweets.

 

[Meathead]

Neither Trump nor most of his supporters care anything about citizens’ First Amendment rights.

You should see what's happening to the first amendment on college campuses.

 

[Stormy Daniels]

Beware the law of unintended consequences.

WHOOPS! Judge's ruling on Donald Trump's Twitter account could open up a YUGE can of worms

Twitter

1. If this stands, it may be a much bigger problem for Twitter than for Trump. Seems the judge just deemed Twitter a public utility
   
   2 replies10 retweets42 likes
   

KiTA‏ @eldarmark
Replying to @Kevin_D_Jones @Moj_kobe
Correction: Any social media that a government employee or agency uses. Facebook. Instagram. Imgur. Reddit. None of them can moderate their sites if it's an American user.

The ruling was not as much about Twitter as it was the nature of the tweets themselves. They are Official White House statements and thus have to be available to everyone


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

So how can it be available to everyone if twitter is allowed to ban certain people?

Because Twitter is not the subject of the ruling, the President of the United States is the subject of the ruling. Twitter is a private company and has no obligation to provide free speech to anyone. However, the President is an elected official and the head of state. In that official capacity the President may not take averse actions against individuals exercising free speech.

This could have been avoided if Donald had kept his personal account a strictly personal account. Instead, he insisted that Twitter is his preferred method for communicating with constituents. And he has used his personal account for official purposes.

 

[Meathead]

Our President is a pussy who only wants people who tell him how great he is

You're the pussy that's keep trying to tell s that Obama was great. It takes a special kind of pussy to think, much less utter that thought.

 

[martybegan]

Beware the law of unintended consequences.

WHOOPS! Judge's ruling on Donald Trump's Twitter account could open up a YUGE can of worms

Twitter

1. If this stands, it may be a much bigger problem for Twitter than for Trump. Seems the judge just deemed Twitter a public utility
   
   2 replies10 retweets42 likes
   

KiTA‏ @eldarmark
Replying to @Kevin_D_Jones @Moj_kobe
Correction: Any social media that a government employee or agency uses. Facebook. Instagram. Imgur. Reddit. None of them can moderate their sites if it's an American user.

The ruling was not as much about Twitter as it was the nature of the tweets themselves. They are Official White House statements and thus have to be available to everyone


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

So how can it be available to everyone if twitter is allowed to ban certain people?

Because Twitter is not the subject of the ruling, the President of the United States is the subject of the ruling. Twitter is a private company and has no obligation to provide free speech to anyone. However, the President is an elected official and the head of state. In that official capacity the President may not take averse actions against individuals exercising free speech.

This could have been avoided if Donald had kept his personal account a strictly personal account. Instead, he insisted that Twitter is his preferred method for communicating with constituents. And he has used his personal account for official purposes.

She called it a public forum. You can't get to gun for Trump on twitter without gunning for twitter as well.

And she also used the term public official a lot, so now all government representatives have to unblock people.

And since being able to comment on Trumps tweets is now a 1st amendment right, Twitter will be required to allow anyone on in the US.

Is this ruling going to be overturned? Probably.

 

[Stormy Daniels]

From what I have heard Twitter can and already has overridden his account and unblocked his blocked list. According to our local news.

Well then, they're lying to you.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

That will get overturned. That judge is a moron.

It must be overturned otherwise NO ONE has a right to block anyone on Twitter. Just another idiot leftist judge.

I guess if it is upheld that means USMB will have to disable our ability to place morons on "Ignore".

 

[Stormy Daniels]

She called it a public forum. You can't get to gun for Trump on twitter without gunning for twitter as well.

Is Twitter Inc. part of the government?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

If the second amendment protects ones right to a AR-15 or a M-16 then surely the first protects ones freedom of speech through the first in public space on the internet.

You are SO confused.

 

[martybegan]

She called it a public forum. You can't get to gun for Trump on twitter without gunning for twitter as well.

Is Twitter Inc. part of the government?

Doesn't matter. people now have the 1st amendment "right" (according to this judge) to reply to a political figures tweets. To exercise that right, they need access to twitter.

Twitter is now a digital public commons, they cannot deny an account without a reason that would withstand strict scrutiny.

 

[martybegan]

That will get overturned. That judge is a moron.

It must be overturned otherwise NO ONE has a right to block anyone on Twitter. Just another idiot leftist judge.

I guess if it is upheld that means USMB will have to disable our ability to place morons on "Ignore".

only for members who are elected officials or government actors.

 

[Stormy Daniels]

Doesn't matter. people now have the 1st amendment "right" (according to this judge) to reply to a political figures tweets. To exercise that right, they need access to twitter.

Twitter is now a digital public commons, they cannot deny an account without a reason that would withstand strict scrutiny.

You don't really believe this convoluted interpretation. You understand full well that the constitution applies to government actions, not the actions or private companies. Despite knowing this, you are barking a convoluted interpretation like a teenage child who is angry at his parents for making him clean his room.

 

[Stormy Daniels]

If the second amendment protects ones right to a AR-15 or a M-16 then surely the first protects ones freedom of speech through the first in public space on the internet.

If you are saying that the constitution protects an individual right to sit at your home computer and be logged into Twitter while armed with an AR-15 then I agree with you completely.

 

[martybegan]

Doesn't matter. people now have the 1st amendment "right" (according to this judge) to reply to a political figures tweets. To exercise that right, they need access to twitter.

Twitter is now a digital public commons, they cannot deny an account without a reason that would withstand strict scrutiny.

You don't really believe this convoluted interpretation. You understand full well that the constitution applies to government actions, not the actions or private companies. Despite knowing this, you are barking a convoluted interpretation like a teenage child who is angry at his parents for making him clean his room.

I think it's going to get overturned, but it's the result of the judge's decision.

She was the one that called it a public forum, and she is the one that said people replying to tweets by government officials are 1st amendment protected.

Thus, if a person wants to exercise this new right, they need access to twitter. if they cannot get the access to reply to the president's tweets, then their 1st amendment protections are being violated. Thus twitter has to allow them access.

 

[iceberg]

Beware the law of unintended consequences.

WHOOPS! Judge's ruling on Donald Trump's Twitter account could open up a YUGE can of worms

Twitter

1. If this stands, it may be a much bigger problem for Twitter than for Trump. Seems the judge just deemed Twitter a public utility
   
   2 replies10 retweets42 likes
   

KiTA‏ @eldarmark
Replying to @Kevin_D_Jones @Moj_kobe
Correction: Any social media that a government employee or agency uses. Facebook. Instagram. Imgur. Reddit. None of them can moderate their sites if it's an American user.

The ruling was not as much about Twitter as it was the nature of the tweets themselves. They are Official White House statements and thus have to be available to everyone


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

So how can it be available to everyone if twitter is allowed to ban certain people?

Because Twitter is not the subject of the ruling, the President of the United States is the subject of the ruling. Twitter is a private company and has no obligation to provide free speech to anyone. However, the President is an elected official and the head of state. In that official capacity the President may not take averse actions against individuals exercising free speech.

This could have been avoided if Donald had kept his personal account a strictly personal account. Instead, he insisted that Twitter is his preferred method for communicating with constituents. And he has used his personal account for official purposes.

you mean like setting up private e-mail servers to avoid gov ones would be bad also and lead to "issues".

twitter policy says nothing about "if a gov employee uses it they must abide by xyz rules" does it? if so please show me.

if trump wants to block people let him block people. it just means he doesn't see them, not they don't see his posts. it may be their "right" to bitch like a little school girl but it's his right not to have to hear it.