As the Denver Post’s Justin Wingerter reports, a federal judge ruled Friday that freshman Rep. Lauren Boebert is not obligated to “unblock” a dissenting constituent from her personal Twitter account, rejecting the argument that Boebert uses both personal and “official” Twitter accounts interchangeably:
“The First Amendment’s protection of the people’s right to free speech, like other rights protected by the Constitution, is implicated only when the government, not a private entity or individual, regulates speech,” wrote the judge, who was appointed by former President Donald Trump.
Buentello, a Democrat, sued Boebert, a Republican, in January and sought a preliminary injunction that would have forced Boebert to unblock Buentello. She cited cases in which courts found that elected officials, including Trump, cannot block constituents. Buentello, who lives in Pueblo, is a Boebert constituent.
Boebert, who was represented by congressional lawyers, argued that Buentello failed to distinguish between Boebert’s personal account, @laurenboebert, and her government account, @repboebert. Buentello is only blocked from viewing and interacting with Boebert’s personal account.
Rep. Boebert’s “personal” Twitter account has the vastly larger following (616k vs. 142k), and is certainly the better-known of the two accounts. Neither account contains a link to the other in the description, and an ordinary person running across one of these accounts would have no reason to assume the other exists at all. In her lawsuit, former state Rep. Bri Buentello argued that because Boebert uses her primary account for a wide array of presumably official communications, the distinction between a “personal” and official account was meaningless.
Although Boebert obtained a favorable ruling affirming her right to block constituents whose opinions she doesn’t like from her ostensibly “personal” account, optically this of course cannot be considered any kind of win. It reinforces the image of Boebert as a paper tiger who can’t back up her tough Tweets when challenged. Coming from the side of the contemporary political debate over “cancel culture” which is demanding that dissenting political voices not ever be deplatformed, celebrating Boebert’s right to block people who disagree with her on Twitter is counterintuitive to say the least.
Apparently, not all “cancel culture” is created equal.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
BY: davebarnes
IN: Tuesday Open Thread
BY: kwtree
IN: The Republican Field for Congress in CO-04
BY: ParkHill
IN: Tuesday Open Thread
BY: spaceman2021
IN: Trump Hush Money Trial: Day Of The Pecker, Part 1
BY: spaceman2021
IN: The Republican Field for Congress in CO-04
BY: spaceman2021
IN: Monday Open Thread
BY: MichaelBowman
IN: Trump Hush Money Trial: Day Of The Pecker, Part 1
BY: MichaelBowman
IN: Trump Hush Money Trial: Day Of The Pecker, Part 1
BY: Lauren Boebert is a Worthless POS
IN: Trump Hush Money Trial: Day Of The Pecker, Part 1
BY: The realist
IN: Trump Hush Money Trial: Day Of The Pecker, Part 1
Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!
Was the ruling just on the preliminary injunction or did it resolve the entire case?
And is someone who follows the Boebert accounts around who can describe the difference between the two accounts' postings?
Well, that didn't take long …
AP Story is here, and says
Key factors on the injunction request decision apparently were (1) lack of government staff involvement and (2) the account's existence before Boebert was elected to and seated in Congress. Overcoming those factors could become fodder for a continuation of the trial. If the contents are the same, focusing on the actual business of Congress, it might be enough to get to a different verdict.
PewPew posts on the Rep. Boebert account much less. That account now has 539 tweets. The @LaurenBoebert account has 4,337 tweets.
This reflects how little Boebert values her actual job as CD3 Rep- she’s much more invested in being a Right Wing Media Star.
When she posts actual constituent news ( like her telephone town hall), she posts on the RepBoebert account.
Other than that, the content on both accounts is basically the same inane, inflammatory right wing talking points and posturing.
David Lane, a renowned Denver attorney, may appeal the judge’s ruling in Buontello’s case against Boebert.
Naturally, the judge was appointed by Trump. All members of the regime are in it purely to protect each other.
"…….are in it purely to protect each other." If such was the case, Trump and his servants would have won every "election fraud" lawsuit that appeared before a Trump appointed judge.