Slant Rant: 'Journalist' Jim Acosta Laments Not Being More Opinionated About Trump on...
Desperate Dems May Call on Kamala Harris in Hopes of Avoiding All-Republican California...
Eric Swalwell Suspends Calif. Gubernatorial Campaign and Now EVERYBODY Has the Same Questi...
Dem Robert Garcia Wants Eric Swalwell to Leave CA Governor’s Race, Silent on...
Report: Artemis II Pilot Makes a Point of Thanking God
Sen. Rick Scott Trumpets Busting the Filibuster
WATCH Mark Warner Squirm As CNN's Dana Bash Asks Him As a Democrat...
Meghan McCain Shuts TDS-Inflicted Barbara Comstock DOWN in BRUTAL Back and Forth About...
In Case Your Skin Hasn't Crawled ENOUGH Already --> Check Out Eric Swalwell's...
WTAF, Daily Caller?! MAGA Is MAGA - There Is No Old Versus New,...
'Lots of Stuff RUMBLING': Eric Swalwell's BFF Ruben Gallego Should Probably Just Go...
WEAK! Lefty Journo LASHES Out As X Slams Him for Bragging That He...
Rejection Letter: Eric Swalwell’s Campaign and Congressional Staff Denounce Him in New Sta...
TPUSA Reporter Savanah Hernandez Assaulted at Anti-ICE Protest
Graham Platner: I Came Out of a ‘Hyper-Masculine, Hyper-Violent Place’ When I Left...

WHOOPS! Judge's ruling on Donald Trump's Twitter account could open up a YUGE can of worms

Is there any doubt that we live in stupid times? Yes? Well, then this ought to put that doubt to rest:

Advertisement

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 …

Advertisement

No, it stems from the fact that it’s a stupid ruling.

Sounds about right.

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

Advertisement

Guess not!

This is fun, isn’t it?

https://twitter.com/Moj_kobe/status/999338899502649344

https://twitter.com/AuldenGhostley/status/999339296564891648

Where do we sign up? We want in on that action!

Advertisement

Buckle up!

Editor’s note: This post has been updated with additional text and tweets.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement