Audio By Carbonatix
A federal judge ruled Wednesday that President Trump cannot block people from his Twitter account in response to their political views because it violates their right to free speech.
U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald reasoned in her opinion that Twitter is a designated public forum, so blocking users based on their political speech "constitutes viewpoint discrimination that violates the First Amendment." She rejected the president's defense that the First Amendment didn't apply, and "the President's personal First Amendment interests supersede those of the plaintiffs," the Knight First Amendment Institute and others.
Buchwald also disagreed with the contention of the defense that injunctive relief can never be awarded against the president, but she decided that she didn't need to "enter that legal thicket at this time." She instead settled on a declaratory judgment that "no government official -- including the President -- is above the law."
She said that "the individual plaintiffs were indisputably blocked" by Mr. Trump "as a result of viewpoint discrimination."
In the original suit, the group of blocked users describe Mr. Trump's frequent use of Twitter as "a kind of digital town hall in which the president and his aides use the tweet function to communicate news and information to the public."
"Because of the way the President and his aides use the @realDonaldTrump Twitter account, the account is a public forum under the First Amendment," the lawsuit states. "Defendants have made the account accessible to all, taking advantage of Twitter's interactive platform to directly engage the President's 33 million followers."
Buchwald applied the Supreme Court's three-part standard for determining whether the communication constitutes private speech or government speech:
- If the speech has been used historically to convey state messages
- If it is "often closely identified in the public mind" with the government
- How much "direct control over the messages conveyed" stems from the government
The defendants disputed this definition, arguing that the @realDonaldTrump account is technically the president's personal page, while @POTUS is designated as his official presidential Twitter account. With this distinction, Mr. Trump's account would qualify as private speech.
However, the Federal District Court for the Southern District of New York found that this was not the case.
"In so holding, we reject the defendants' contentions that the First Amendment does not apply in this case and that the President's personal First Amendment interests supersede those of plaintiffs," the memorandum reads.
Latest Stories
-
The search for clean water has failed — so can Nanton Zuo save the water source it already has?
3 minutes -
Accra-Kumasi Expressway construction to begin in January 2027 – CEO
10 minutes -
Parents in Ashanti make U-turn on Category C, D Schools as reporting deadline approaches
17 minutes -
September 21 declared public holiday for Founder’s Day
21 minutes -
Indonesia rescuers battle turbulent seas in search for 129 people after passenger ship capsizes
37 minutes -
Iceland’s last whaling company shrugs off threat of permanent ban
44 minutes -
‘Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks’ – GBA President on CJ’s SOEs comments
45 minutes -
Member of UK Armed Forces dies in road traffic incident in Ukraine
47 minutes -
Mahama to honour GAF Engineers Regiment with Order of the Companion of the Volta
50 minutes -
Agbodza demands quality, value for money in Accra-Kumasi Expressway construction
52 minutes -
Companies left China to dodge tariffs, now some are heading back
52 minutes -
Bali police investigate after Australian man and children found dead in home
52 minutes -
Government will not borrow to fund Accra-Kumasi Expressway – Ato Forson
1 hour -
‘Judicial Service’s defence of Chief Justice was lacklustre’ – GBA President
1 hour -
Etihad Airways sees strong demand, higher passenger capacity despite Iran war, CEO says
1 hour