Court to Trump: Blocking Twitter critics is unconstitutional

Legal Issues

President Donald Trump lost a major Twitter fight Tuesday when a federal appeals court said that his daily musings and pronouncements were overwhelmingly official in nature and that he violated the First Amendment whenever he blocked a critic to silence a viewpoint.

The effect of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision is likely to reverberate throughout politics after the Manhattan court warned that any elected official using a social media account “for all manner of official purposes” and then excluding critics violates free speech.

“The government is not permitted to ‘amplify’ favored speech by banning or burdening viewpoints with which it disagrees,” the appeals court said.

Because it involved Trump, the ruling is getting more attention than a January decision by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that found a Virginia politician violated the First Amendment rights of one of her constituents by blocking him from a Facebook page.

Still, the appeals court in New York acknowledged, not every social media account operated by a public official is a government account, and First Amendment violations must be considered on a case-by-case basis.

“The irony in all of this is that we write at a time in the history of this nation when the conduct of our government and its officials is subject to wide-open, robust debate,” Circuit Judge Barrington D. Parker wrote on behalf of a three-judge panel.

The debate generates a “level of passion and intensity the likes of which have rarely been seen,” the court’s decision read.

“This debate, as uncomfortable and as unpleasant as it frequently may be, is nonetheless a good thing,” the 2nd Circuit added. “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.”

The Department of Justice is disappointed by the ruling and is exploring possible next steps, agency spokesperson Kelly Laco said.

“As we argued, President Trump’s decision to block users from his personal twitter account does not violate the First Amendment,” Laco said in an emailed statement.

Appeal options include asking the panel to reconsider, or seeking a reversal from the full 2nd Circuit or from the U.S. Supreme Court.

The decision came in a case brought by the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University. It had sued on behalf of seven individuals blocked by Trump after criticizing his policies.

Related listings

  • Trump asks Supreme Court to unfreeze border wall money

    Trump asks Supreme Court to unfreeze border wall money

    Legal Issues 07/13/2019

    The Trump administration on Friday asked the Supreme Court to lift a freeze on Pentagon money it wants to use to build sections of a border wall with Mexico.Two lower courts have ruled against the administration in a lawsuit over the funding. Last we...

  • Ohio high court won't hear challenge over bite-mark evidence

    Ohio high court won't hear challenge over bite-mark evidence

    Legal Issues 06/15/2019

    The Ohio Supreme Court won't hear an appeal from a man sentenced to death for the 1985 rape, torture and slaying of a 12-year-old boy.Attorneys for 52-year-old Danny Lee Hill have unsuccessfully argued bite-mark evidence used against him was unreliab...

  • Ronaldo rape lawsuit in Vegas moved from Nevada to US court

    Ronaldo rape lawsuit in Vegas moved from Nevada to US court

    Legal Issues 06/06/2019

    A lawsuit by a Nevada woman accusing soccer star Cristiano Ronaldo of raping her in 2009 at a Las Vegas Strip resort has been moved from state to federal court in Las Vegas, her lawyer said Wednesday.“We basically just switched venues, but the ...

Experienced Business Law Attorneys - Business Law Attorneys in Chicago, Illinois

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced today that it is clarifying policy guidance (PDF, 71 KB) on the specific work activities its officers should consider when determining whether an individual qualifies for TN nonimmigrant status as an economist.

Companies of all sizes have to deal with a lot of bureaucracy and paperwork just to do business. Long gone are the days of simply designing and manufacturing a great product and putting it out there. It can be incredibly overwhelming trying to do business without making yourself vulnerable to a lawsuit.

If you need to craft an agreement between you and investors or business partners, it is prudent to have it reviewed by a business attorney before you sign anything. You may also want to have your vendor contracts, office leases, sales agreements, and other types of agreements looked over as well. From start-ups to established corporations, the Chicago business attorneys at the Roth Law Group have the know-how to help businesses keep legal trouble at bay.

The attorneys at the Roth Law Group have helped their clients at every stage of the business creation and operation process. From registering as a legally-recognized business entity to hiring employees and then copywriting or trademarking a product idea, the right guidance in the beginning can keep you out of trouble later on.