LISTEN: Prof. Turley On SCOTUS Keeping Trump on the Ballot (and a Deep...
Defenders of Democracy Alert: AG Garland Calls Election Integrity Laws 'Discriminatory' an...
The Nation: The Supreme Court 'Twisted' the 'Crystal-Clear' 14th Amendment
President Joe Biden Says Justice Clarence Thomas 'Likes to Spend a Lot of...
You Don't Despise the Media Enough: Only SOME Baseless Claims Are Bad (Take...
WHOOPS: Jim Acosta Steps on a Giant Rake While Celebrating Abortion Amendment in...
Intolerance on Campus: Leftwing Berkeley Students Form Violent Mob and Attack Jewish Speak...
NBC News’ Ken Dilanian Fears SCOTUS Is Interfering With the Election
The 9-0 Trump Victory Is Leaving Liberal Dreams Crushed
'Plaid-Wrapped Soul': Watch Florida Man STUN Karaoke Crowd
'I've Seen It for Myself!' John Kirby's 'Doing the SNL Sketch' to Vouch...
Sour Grapes Alert: Nikki Haley Says She's No Longer Bound by RNC Pledge...
ATF Director’s Interview on Face the Nation Was a Complete Disaster
Keith Olbermann Loses It (More Than He Already Has) Following SCOTUS Trump Ballot...
After Voiding Elon Musk's $56 Billion Compensation Package, Guess How Much the Lawyers...

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