Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Wednesday July 12 2017, @01:08PM   Printer-friendly
from the silence-all-disagreement-and-only-agreement-will-be-seen dept.

Columbia University's Knight First Amendment Institute has filed a lawsuit against President Trump for blocking seven users on Twitter, claiming that the action violates the users' First Amendment right to participate in a public political forum:

The institute filed suit today on behalf of seven Twitter users who were blocked by the president, which prevents them from seeing or replying to his tweets. It threatened legal action in a letter to Trump in June, and now "asks the court to declare that the viewpoint-based blocking of people from the @realDonaldTrump account is unconstitutional."

The lawsuit, which was filed in the Southern District of New York, elaborates on the Knight Institute's earlier letter. It contends that Trump's Twitter account is a public political forum where citizens have a First Amendment right to speak. Under this theory, blocking users impedes their right to participate in a political conversation and stops them from viewing official government communication. Therefore, if Trump blocks people for criticizing his political viewpoints, he'd be doing the equivalent of kicking them out of a digital town hall.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Informative) by tonyPick on Wednesday July 12 2017, @01:47PM (9 children)

    by tonyPick (1237) on Wednesday July 12 2017, @01:47PM (#538070) Homepage Journal

    How can a members only private web site be a public political forum?

    When Donald Trump makes it part of the official Presidential Record.
    https://theconversation.com/donald-trumps-tweets-are-now-presidential-records-71973 [theconversation.com]

    Congress created the Presidential Records Act of 1978 out of concern that former president Nixon would destroy the tapes that led to his resignation.

    The PRA sets strict rules for presidential records created during a president’s term. They include material related to “constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President.” This includes records created on electronic platforms like email, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Informative=3, Total=3
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 12 2017, @02:33PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 12 2017, @02:33PM (#538104)

    If I store a backup of a website in the cloud it does not mean cloud TOS apply to the original website.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 12 2017, @05:59PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 12 2017, @05:59PM (#538208)

      I don't understand how your comment intersects with the topic. First of all, the lawsuit is about people getting blocked by President Trump. It's not about him deleting his tweets. Second, his tweets aren't usually a second copy of something that was originally posted on whitehouse.gov. Maybe I just don't understand your comment.

  • (Score: 2) by BK on Wednesday July 12 2017, @04:04PM (5 children)

    by BK (4868) on Wednesday July 12 2017, @04:04PM (#538141)

    It doesn't follow that the need to include something in the official record makes it a public forum. It seems to me that if someone has been blocked via twitter, they could still request and expect to receive a copy of the records in question via FOIA, etc.

    --
    ...but you HAVE heard of me.
    • (Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Wednesday July 12 2017, @04:29PM (4 children)

      by hemocyanin (186) on Wednesday July 12 2017, @04:29PM (#538153) Journal

      It's easier than that. They can just logout and then view the posts. There is only two things blocking does: It prevents a person from directly responding thus limiting the chance the person will be heard by the politician (but really, unless the tweet is accompanied by a six figure donation, what politician will actually listen). Even so, people can still indirectly respond (take a screenshot while logged out and add snark in the user's own tweet).
       

      • (Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Wednesday July 12 2017, @04:29PM (1 child)

        by hemocyanin (186) on Wednesday July 12 2017, @04:29PM (#538154) Journal

        only ONE thing

        • (Score: 3, Funny) by Gaaark on Wednesday July 12 2017, @11:12PM

          by Gaaark (41) on Wednesday July 12 2017, @11:12PM (#538424) Journal

          Cleric: And the Lord spake, saying, "First shalt thou take out the Holy Pin. Then shalt thou count to two, no more, no less. Two shall be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be two. Four shalt thou not count, neither count thou one, excepting that thou then proceed to two. Five is right out. Once the number two, being the second number, be reached, then lobbest thou thy Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch towards thy foe, who, being naughty in My sight, shall snuff it.
                  Brother Maynard: Amen.
                  All: Amen.
                  King Arthur: Right. Zero... one... five!
                  Galahad: Two, sir.
                  King Arthur: Two! [throws the grenade]

          With humble apologies to Sir Monty Python, Sir Esquire, the Sir Second, Sir Jr.

          --
          --- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
      • (Score: 2) by takyon on Wednesday July 12 2017, @06:26PM

        by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Wednesday July 12 2017, @06:26PM (#538224) Journal

        It's pretty bizarre that Twitter would make tweets unviewable to blocked users when they can just log out. They should change that.

        --
        [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
      • (Score: 2) by cykros on Friday July 14 2017, @04:47AM

        by cykros (989) on Friday July 14 2017, @04:47AM (#538970)

        One thing that makes Donald perhaps so terrifying and yet appear so cool to some people is how accessible he can appear, and the fact that that often involves amusing him in some fashion or other, which gives us a glimpse into his almost juvenile drives. Basically, you might not need a six figure donation; as we saw recently, all you need to do is tickle him with a picture of him taking on CNN in the ring. It's the same principle that drives John Oliver's Catheter Cowboy ads on Fox and Friends.

        While he may not be the savior much of his voter base perhaps believes he is, and honesty isn't a strong suit, he isn't actually much like a run of the mill politician, and operates under a different set of parameters.

        That all said, this is a bit tangential to the topic. Twitter blocking is effectively nothing other than a rather gentle "your attention is unwelcome" notice to curb harassment. This case is without merit.

  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by bob_super on Wednesday July 12 2017, @05:11PM

    by bob_super (1357) on Wednesday July 12 2017, @05:11PM (#538181)

    The second problem is that @potus is supposed to be the official channel, but @realDonaldTrump is where all the insanity gets posted.
    Legally, one could define the first as public space nobody should get blocked from, while the other would be a "private citizen"'s blabberspace with blocking rights.

    But this particular politician is not about to separate his private and public megaphones.