President Trump sued for blocking people on Twitter

[webfact]

U.S. free-speech group sues Trump for blocking Twitter users

By Dustin Volz

 

The masthead of U.S. President Donald Trump's @realDonaldTrump Twitter account is seen on July 11, 2017. @realDonaldTrump/Handout via REUTERS

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A free-speech group on Tuesday sued U.S. President Donald Trump for blocking Twitter users from his @realDonaldTrump account, arguing the practice violates the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

 

The lawsuit, brought by the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University in New York and joined by seven individual Twitter users, claims Trumpblocked a number of accounts whose owners replied to his tweets with comments that criticized, mocked or disagreed with the president.

 

Trump's blocking of the accounts amounted to an unconstitutional effort to suppress dissent, according to the lawsuit filed in federal court in the Southern District of New York.

 

Because Trump frequently turns to Twitter to make policy statements, his account qualifies as a public forum from which the government cannot exclude people on the basis of their views, according to the lawsuit. Twitter users are unable to see or respond to tweets from accounts that block them.

 

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Last month White House spokesman Sean Spicer said Trump's tweets were considered "official statements by the president of the United States."

 

The suit names Spicer and Dan Scavino, the White House director of social media, as defendants in addition to Trump. It asks for the blocking to be deemed unconstitutional and seeks an injunction to require the president to unblock users.

 

The complaint follows a letter from the Knight Institute to Trump last month warning it would sue if users were not unblocked.

 

"Everyone being able to see the president's tweets feels vital to democracy," Joseph Papp, one of the seven Twitter users involved in the suit, said in a statement.

 

Papp, an author, said he had been a registered Republican for 10 years and did not join the suit for political reasons, but that he "felt a deep sense of unease" when he was blocked.

 

Trump's Twitter use has drawn intense interest for his unvarnished commentary about his agenda and attacks on critics. His tweets often lead to tens of thousands of retweets and comments and can shape the news.

 

The Knight Institute's arguments may have merit, independent free speech and internet law scholars say, in part because Trump's tweets are used to announce policy decisions or can influence legislation. Previous cases involving politicians blocking users on Facebook may bolster its case.

 

The federal suit, case number 1:17-cv-05205, was filed in the Southern District of New York.

 

(Editing by Bill Rigby and Jeffrey; Benkoe)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-07-12

[Grouse]

Can Trump be suspended from Twitter for being off topic and trolling?

[stevenl]

Sounds to me they have a valid point.

 

Either it is official communications, so accessible to all, or private, and can be blocked.

[johnefallis]

Just more idiots with nothing better to do since they lost the election and think the President now has to listen to them cry and complain constantly. 

The 1st Amendment doesn't guarantee you an audience, nor does it force anyone to listen to you. -smh

[dunroaming]

58 minutes ago, johnefallis said:

Just more idiots with nothing better to do since they lost the election and think the President now has to listen to them cry and complain constantly. 

The 1st Amendment doesn't guarantee you an audience, nor does it force anyone to listen to you. -smh

The idiot here is the POTUS who thinks that Twitter is the right way to communicate with the public.  It just makes him look stupid on a daily basis.

[smotherb]

1 hour ago, johnefallis said:

Just more idiots with nothing better to do since they lost the election and think the President now has to listen to them cry and complain constantly. 

The 1st Amendment doesn't guarantee you an audience, nor does it force anyone to listen to you. -smh

Uh, does the first amendment allow anyone to block transmitting an opinion--that is what the suit is about. Talk about idiots; where did you see people were being forced to listen or guaranteed an audience?

[Slip]

1 hour ago, johnefallis said:

Just more idiots with nothing better to do since they lost the election and think the President now has to listen to them cry and complain constantly. 

The 1st Amendment doesn't guarantee you an audience, nor does it force anyone to listen to you. -smh

Did you even read the OP before you rushed to your deflection? 

 

Quote

Because Trump frequently turns to Twitter to make policy statements, his account qualifies as a public forum from which the government cannot exclude people on the basis of their views, according to the lawsuit. Twitter users are unable to see or respond to tweets from accounts that block them.

 

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Last month White House spokesman Sean Spicer said Trump's tweets were considered "official statements by the president of the United States."

Quote

"Everyone being able to see the president's tweets feels vital to democracy," Joseph Papp, one of the seven Twitter users involved in the suit, said in a statement.

 

Papp, an author, said he had been a registered Republican for 10 years and did not join the suit for political reasons, but that he "felt a deep sense of unease" when he was blocked.

 

[KhunBENQ]

Whatever his legacy will be, in any case he will be the first Twitter president.

Would the US government now have to intervene if Twitter would be on the verge of bankruptcy?

[johng]

Just more idiots with nothing better to do since they lost the election

I find it bizarre that anyone would even think of suing someone for blocking a "tweet"

[Jingthing]

Either he's president of all the American people, or he's not.

No, I don't think any U.S. president that uses a medium as a now acknowledged official communication tool should be allowed to block any U.S. citizen. 

Russian citizens, da.

It is hard to know the citizenship of twitterati.

I also think considering how inflammatory so many of the clown president's tweets have been that there is a strong case to have him banned from twitter.

But I reckon twitter would never do that for both business reasons and FEAR reasons.

The clown president is infamous for personal retaliation against his foes.

[ilostmypassword]

2 hours ago, johnefallis said:

Just more idiots with nothing better to do since they lost the election and think the President now has to listen to them cry and complain constantly. 

The 1st Amendment doesn't guarantee you an audience, nor does it force anyone to listen to you. -smh

Another "sore loser" deflection.

[champers]

Twits all together and deserving of each other.

[JHolmesJr]

made me wonder if i could sue the resident ignore list champ for the same…..but naaaaaaaah……lol.

[dunroaming]

Whichever way you look at it this Presidency is as bizarre as it gets.  Trump has brought his lunacy to Washington and the result is absolute chaos.  You simply cannot run a country like this.

[wwest5829]

3 hours ago, johnefallis said:

Just more idiots with nothing better to do since they lost the election and think the President now has to listen to them cry and complain constantly. 

The 1st Amendment doesn't guarantee you an audience, nor does it force anyone to listen to you. -smh

Hmmm, sorry. You either did not read the legal reasoning or you simply choose to ignore it. Fortunately, in either case, your outlook has no validity. That said, my 1st impression of the headline was much as you expressed. However, after learning the reasoning, I have to agree that the point is, if he is using this as a public forum of government, then he is not entitled to block. It will be interesting to watch as it and other matters unfold.

[metisdead]

An off topic post has been removed. 

[RickBradford]

The Left really has lost its collective mind over President Trump.

 

Just when you think they can't get any sillier and more trivial, up they come whining about being blocked on Twitter, boo-hoo-hoo.

 

What was their meltdown last week - President Trump video about bodyslamming CNN? What will they be upset about next week - something to do with coloured balloons and crayons?

[smotherb]

2 hours ago, johng said:

I find it bizarre that anyone would even think of suing someone for blocking a "tweet"

It appears logic doesn't interfere with the thoughts of many Trumpeters, but the premise of the suit is:  "Because Trump frequently turns to Twitter to make policy statements, his account qualifies as a public forum from which the government cannot exclude people on the basis of their views, according to the lawsuit. Twitter users are unable to see or respond to tweets from accounts that block them. "

 

[IAMHERE]

I control my twitter, I control my Facebook, I control my email, so should the POTUS.

[JHolmesJr]

58 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

Whichever way you look at it this Presidency is as bizarre as it gets.  Trump has brought his lunacy to Washington and the result is absolute chaos.  You simply cannot run a country like this.

obstruction is the way losers react in american politics….just buckle up for the ride and enjoy the show.

[smotherb]

1 minute ago, IAMHERE said:

I control my twitter, I control my Facebook, I control my email, so should the POTUS.

You are not the president and you do not espouse policy. The suit argues that doing so makes his twitter account a public forum. Settling differences of opinion is part of what our judicial system is supposed to do.

[JHolmesJr]

LOL…..cant believe they are now upset he banned them on twitter…its how the system works.

[janclaes47]

Makes me think we can sue a certain poster active in this thread, and a known Trump hater, for having such an extensive ignore list.

 

A list that probably will grow by 1 right now.

[Srikcir]

7 hours ago, webfact said:

Because Trump frequently turns to Twitter to make policy statements, his account qualifies as a public forum

That is paid for by the American people. They have a right to respond without blocking and Trump has the right to rebut. If Trump can't tolerate unchallenged criticism, he should make his remarks through privately-owned FOX & Friends who is not required to televise rebuttal criticism.

I hope the ACLU files with the court as an amicus curiae to offer their guidance for a court response in favor of the plaintiffs.

 

[Peterw42]

 

1 minute ago, JHolmesJr said:

LOL…..cant believe they are now upset he banned them on twitter…its how the system works.

Its a government information channel, he announces policy on there. you cant ban people from government information

 

I think Nazi Germany started to block Jewish from people government information around 1938

[janclaes47]

3 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

That is paid for by the American people.

Last time I checked Twitter was listed on the stock market, so paid for by investors.

[alocacoc]

4 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

If Trump can't tolerate unchallenged criticism

 

Criticism? You should read some comments on Trump tweets.

[Grouse]

Maybe I'm just getting old but Trump seems so juvenile...

[Morch]

20 minutes ago, janclaes47 said:

Makes me think we can sue a certain poster active in this thread, and a known Trump hater, for having such an extensive ignore list.

 

A list that probably will grow by 1 right now.

 

We'll he's not an official, so doesn't apply. Further, the ignore function on this forum does work the same as tweeter's. When you block another poster, you just don't see his comments (unless quoted by others), the ignored party can still read posts by you and comment on them.

[dunroaming]

1 hour ago, JHolmesJr said:

obstruction is the way losers react in american politics….just buckle up for the ride and enjoy the show.

I was enjoying the show or should I say circus.  However now it is becoming way beyond the joke that Trump initially was as he continues on his journey of destruction.  Hopefully it will become self-destruction anytime soon.