President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%↓

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

90%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

90%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks

40%

30%

20%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) J. Sonnenberg

(R) Ted Harvey

20%↑

15%↑

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Jeff Crank

(R) Doug Bruce

20%

20%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

90%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen

85%↑

 

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi

60%↑

40%↑

20%↑

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
May 23, 2018 12:38 PM UTC

Federal Judge Orders Trump To Stop Blocking Citizens

  • 3 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols
President Donald Trump.

The Hill reports on a win for transparency on social media that could have repercussions for politicos at all levels–a federal judge has declared that President Donald Trump cannot legally block critics on the Twitter social media platform:

Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald, of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, said President Trump’s Twitter account is a public forum and blocking people who reply to his tweets with differing opinions constitutes viewpoint discrimination, which violates the First Amendment.

The court’s ruling is a major win for the Knight Foundation, which brought the lawsuit on behalf of seven people who were blocked from the @realDonaldTrump account because of opinions they expressed in reply tweets.

Buchwald, who was appointed by former President Clinton, rejected Trump’s argument that the First Amendment does not apply in this case and that the president’s personal First Amendment interests supersede those of the plaintiffs.

The court found that the act of blocking a critic on Twitter simply for disagreeing could be harmful to First Amendment rights of the critic, since they are unable to respond to items posted by the President. Merely muting a user, while accomplishing the same goal of not forcing Donald Trump to personally lay eyes on criticism, preserves the ability of the “offending” user to respond in the same thread.

We would expect that most politicians who are active on the platform have some number of users who they have blocked–and some among those for reasons that wouldn’t reasonably rise above a viewpoint disagreement. If this precedent were to hold true for all public officials, it would mean a lot of Twitter blocks, by a lot of politicians, are unconstitutional.

And, well, that would be a big deal.

Comments

3 thoughts on “Federal Judge Orders Trump To Stop Blocking Citizens

    1. He will. 

      But even then, why is Joe User more active against Trump than our Representatives in DC? Dems need to get off their asses and fight this Administration tooth, nail, Twitter, filibuster, everyfuckingthing. They are pitiful and weak and *letting* Trump win by the minute, hour, and day. These morons’ wait-until-November strategy is pure impotence and we’ll be looking at Trump’s second inaugural by the time it resonates, if it ever does.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

192 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!