Earlier, my friend Doug told you about New York Times Editorial Board member Mara Gay suggesting that Meta reinstating Donald Trump’s Facebook and Instagram accounts could usher in the downfall of America as we know it.
NYT's @MaraGay on Meta reinstating Trump: "Do you want to be that institution that really helps take down the country?" pic.twitter.com/43RCDjOQRA
— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) January 26, 2023
So it’s probably safe to say that Gay is not super thrilled with the ACLU right about now:
This is the right call. Like it or not, President Trump is one of the country’s leading political figures and the public has a strong interest in hearing his speech. https://t.co/PbY8AevFDy
— ACLU (@ACLU) January 26, 2023
Who are you guys and what have you done with the ACLU???
Recommended
Rare modern ACLU W
— Damin Toell (@damintoell) January 26, 2023
Seriously, are we in the Upside-Down? The ACLU is actually promoting the concept of free speech, even if that speech is speech some people don’t like or agree with?
https://t.co/AbP2LTCZLE pic.twitter.com/aXCUi71O63
— Bob Jeffers (@bobjeffers559) January 26, 2023
Heh.
Of course, as pleasantly surprised as we should all be by the ACLU’s sudden — and likely brief — turn toward their original mission, the surprise is a very unpleasant one for a lot of other people.
i too am surprised by the rhetoric coming from *squints* the AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION pic.twitter.com/RWTGGMDTxA
— siraj hashmi (@SirajAHashmi) January 26, 2023
Seriously, the libs are mad as hell right now.
in this thread: angry pronoun people who would have been thrilled if the ACLU had posted this instead pic.twitter.com/aX2fwiZd5H
— Gregg Re (@gregg_re) January 26, 2023
the salt from the replies and quote tweets when the ACLU returns to its roots is just *chef’s kiss* https://t.co/bfiQbq51Li
— siraj hashmi (@SirajAHashmi) January 26, 2023
Here’s just a small but delectable sample:
— claire de lune (@ClaireMPLS) January 26, 2023
Nope. Wrong on this one.
— Dennis Perkins (@DennisPerkins5) January 26, 2023
Facebook/Instagram are companies. If any person violates their terms, how is that blanketed by the 1st Amendment? They are not government entities suppressing his free speech.
— 𝙹𝖊𝕟𝓷ì𝕗𝕖𝕣 ☆ (@Jennicide) January 26, 2023
Privately held media companies are not obligated to print or air violent fascist rhetoric. This is *not* constitutionally protected free speech. He can go outside and rant on the street freely, but Meta nor Twitter cannot be compelled to broadcast it
— Stefanie Iris Weiss (@EcoSexuality) January 26, 2023
You’ve entirely lost the thread, you will never receive another donation from me
— Stefanie Iris Weiss (@EcoSexuality) January 26, 2023
You are really testing my commitment to remaining a donor.
— Kim Masters (@kimmasters) January 26, 2023
When speech is used to foment violence in order to cancel out my rights or my vote on behalf of a con man and criminal, it’s the wrong call.
— Peter Ramsey (@pramsey342) January 26, 2023
Absolute bollocks
— Stop sniveling and do something. (@GregProops) January 26, 2023
Speak for yourself, I personally have zero interest in hearing his speech
— Robin St. Clare (@robinwritesMD) January 26, 2023
So don’t listen to it, Robin.
https://twitter.com/1SpencerGarrett/status/1618565472185876480
Sanity got to them. But don’t worry, Spencer: if history’s anything to go by, they’ll be back to fighting free speech before you know it.
In the meantime:
Damn, an awful lot of fascists in here wanting to silence political opposition. Just like Hitler did.
— Count Dankula (@CountDankulaTV) January 26, 2023
Forget it; they’re rolling.
***
Related:
ACLU memo: Free speech cases may take backseat to organization’s equality and justice work
***
