Is there any doubt that we live in stupid times? Yes? Well, then this ought to put that doubt to rest:
Breaking –>>>
*TRUMP CAN'T BLOCK USERS FROM HIS TWITTER FEED, JUDGE RULES
*TRUMP'S FEED IS A 'PUBLIC FORUM,' FEDERAL JUDGE IN N.Y. SAYS
*JUDGE SAYS TRUMP BLOCKING USERS VIOLATES FIRST AMENDMENT@BobVanVoris
— David S. Joachim (@davidjoachim) May 23, 2018
Here's the 75-page opinion: https://t.co/xn4szkAere
(h/t @xor) https://t.co/Wn2451T57I
— David S. Joachim (@davidjoachim) May 23, 2018
Federal district court judge in New York says Trump cannot block Twitter users over their political views on his @realDonaldTrump account in a fascinating decision that deals with the frontiers of digital public speech. pic.twitter.com/8xPXuzZ2s9
— Byron Tau (@ByronTau) May 23, 2018
More from Bloomberg:
The judge said the comment section of Trump’s personal account, @realDonaldTrump, is a public forum and that blocking users on the basis of political speech is a violation of their free-speech rights under the First Amendment.
U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald in Manhattan issued the ruling Wednesday in a lawsuit brought by the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University on behalf of seven Twitter users who were blocked by Trump after replying to his tweets.“This case requires us to consider whether a public official may, consistent with the First Amendment, ’block’ a person from his Twitter account in response to the political views that person has expressed, and whether the analysis differs because that public official is the President of the United States,” Buchwald said. “The answer to both questions is no.”
Mkay …
Can lawyer friends please explain this one to me? I'm assuming my disbelief stems from my ignorance of constitutional law. https://t.co/8Sp4gKXkto
— Rabbi Josh Yuter (@JYuter) May 23, 2018
No, it stems from the fact that it’s a stupid ruling.
Not sure how separation of powers works in the case of a judge ordering a president not to block people on Twitter but let me just say that the judge is an idiot
— John Podhoretz (@jpodhoretz) May 23, 2018
This is a farcical decision and makes zero sense on the merits. https://t.co/ExzWYmVRAd
— Esoteric Jeff (@EsotericCD) May 23, 2018
Sounds about right.
Look, judges, all of us can tell that at this point, some of you are just making it up as you go along.
— Jim Geraghty (@jimgeraghty) May 23, 2018
We're just making up all sorts of brand new constitutional rights because of Trump. "Trump shouldn't do that" = unconstitutional. https://t.co/Hpr3ODp4g2
— Mo Mo (@molratty) May 23, 2018
The Left currently: The 2nd Amendment only covers muskets because of when it was written, but getting blocked by a president on Twitter is a violation of our 1st Amendment rights. #MakesSense
— Doug Powers (@ThePowersThatBe) May 23, 2018
It’s almost as if this was a stupid ruling. A stupid ruling that may wind up creating more problems than it solves.
https://twitter.com/sevenlayercake/status/999354777908719616
https://twitter.com/Ornery_Opinions/status/999344077383417856
So a politician can't block neoNazis who disrupts his/her feed and attacks others who interact on it? Or trolls? Or people who tag discussions with porn?
— David Harsanyi (@davidharsanyi) May 23, 2018
Guess not!
If a public figure in government has you blocked, I guess they have to unblock you now.
Howdy, Keith Ellison. https://t.co/X9ud5M70pu
— Damn, I'm smirky. (@corrcomm) May 23, 2018
By order of US District Court Judge Naomi Reich Buchwald, I hereby demand you unblock me you cowards @keithellison @DWStweets pic.twitter.com/cgGgDc7PiH
— Stephen Miller (@redsteeze) May 23, 2018
Get ready, public officials: your days of illegally hiding from my fart jokes are OVERhttps://t.co/a3MZ5KoIhc
— David Burge (@iowahawkblog) May 23, 2018
LMAO. The federal court ruling that blocking someone on Twitter constitutes a violation of their First Amendment rights doesn’t just apply to the President — it applies to *all* public officials. Talk about being careful what you wish for. The draggings will now be unblockable. pic.twitter.com/KGe5aDPucD
— Jerry Dunleavy (@JerryDunleavy) May 23, 2018
This is fun, isn’t it?
Then Twitter cannot ban anyone. https://t.co/CKQ7anWUZk
— alexandriabrown (@alexthechick) May 23, 2018
https://twitter.com/Moj_kobe/status/999338899502649344
Hey @jack, you got some work ahead of you thanks to #Resist and the NY fed court. https://t.co/zU6n41nlge
— Hikikomori Quisqueyano (@xchixm) May 23, 2018
https://twitter.com/AuldenGhostley/status/999339296564891648
Where do we sign up? We want in on that action!
If this stands, it may be a much bigger problem for Twitter than for Trump. Seems the judge just deemed Twitter a public utility
— Kevin D Jones (@Kevin_D_Jones) May 23, 2018
The judge effectively has declared Twitter to be a "public forum". The consequences to this company's policies are significant should this decision stand.
So, yeah, "extremely wrong" is quite apt. https://t.co/7UpdDSsr21
— Phares (@Not_Pharisee) May 23, 2018
Buckle up!
Correction: Any social media that a government employee or agency uses.
Facebook. Instagram. Imgur. Reddit.
None of them can moderate their sites if it's an American user.
— KiTA (@eldarmark) May 23, 2018
Editor’s note: This post has been updated with additional text and tweets.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member