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
-
Pay NABCO trainees – Mahama challenges Bawumia
1 min -
Police ‘waiting for court date’ on Erastus’ case is a lie – Samson Anyenini
11 mins -
Sports facilities are better managed by institutions – UG Sports Director on maintenance of Legon stadium
41 mins -
Ghanaian businesses must align vision with strategy to mitigate ESG Risks – KPMG
52 mins -
MTN achieves 30% localisation of Scancom PLC
53 mins -
Attorney-General: Some lawyers sacrifice ethics for ‘cheap’ political gains
1 hour -
Bond market: Volume up by 12.45% to GH¢746m
1 hour -
Cedi records year-to-date loss of nearly 29%; one dollar going for GH¢17.10
1 hour -
‘Our priorities are wrong in Ghana’ – UG Sports Director on sports development
1 hour -
The Fourth Estate’s investigative report wins 2nd place at 2024 AIJC
2 hours -
GPL: Our fans spur us on – GoldStars head coach Frimpong Manso on unbeaten run
2 hours -
Plantain chips are breaking hearts in Africa
2 hours -
61 new architects acquire state license to practice in Ghana
3 hours -
Masloc CEO honoured as capacity building Shero of the Year
3 hours -
MPs’ Repeated Attempts to Sue the Speaker: Unintended Consequences for the 2024 Elections?
3 hours