Slashdot Mirror
Trump Can Block People On Twitter If He Wants, Administration Says (arstechnica.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: The administration of President Donald Trump is scoffing at a lawsuit by Twitter users who claim in a federal lawsuit that their constitutional rights are being violated because the president has blocked them from his @realDonaldTrump Twitter handle. "It would send the First Amendment deep into uncharted waters to hold that a president's choices about whom to follow, and whom to block, on Twitter -- a privately run website that, as a central feature of its social-media platform, enables all users to block particular individuals from viewing posts -- violate the Constitution." That's part of what Michael Baer, a Justice Department attorney, wrote to the New York federal judge overseeing the lawsuit Friday. In addition, the Justice Department said the courts are powerless to tell Trump how he can manage his private Twitter handle, which has 35.8 million followers.
"To the extent that the President's management of his Twitter account constitutes state action, it is unquestionably action that lies within his discretion as Chief Executive; it is therefore outside the scope of judicial enforcement," Baer wrote. (PDF) Baer added that an order telling Trump how to manage his Twitter feed "would raise profound separation-of-powers concerns by intruding directly into the president's chosen means of communicating to millions of Americans."
"To the extent that the President's management of his Twitter account constitutes state action, it is unquestionably action that lies within his discretion as Chief Executive; it is therefore outside the scope of judicial enforcement," Baer wrote. (PDF) Baer added that an order telling Trump how to manage his Twitter feed "would raise profound separation-of-powers concerns by intruding directly into the president's chosen means of communicating to millions of Americans."
Sounds about right.
The Justice Department is powerless to tell the courts what they can, can't, or must, do.
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
Trump has made Constitutional lawyers, fact checkers, and news organizations richer.
Table-ized A.I.
Of course he can. It's his personal account.
Within seconds of a tweet being posted, he'll have hundreds of replies, almost instantaneously, from the same people consistently, who always manage to get out 6 part tweets within a few seconds of each other.
Spam, essentially. And what do we do with spam? We block it.
Admittedly that's how most people deal with @realDonaldTrump anyway.
I closed my twitter account because of trump.
https://www.youtube.com/c/BrendaEM
ALl they have to do it SIGN OUT and they can see what he post's. Its not like he banned from the internet or from the site completely. Just another smear campaign against the president they don't like.
not the first time, not the last that Trump's administration ignores US law and tradition and decides whatever he does is ok.
Remember kids, if you're not paying for the service, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT THAT IS BEING SOLD.
There's a fence around the White House, so it's pretty clear that the government has the right to block people from places it operates. Kicking a lunatic or a heckler out of a press conference or rally is no different than blocking someone on twitter. Free speech does not include the right to be disruptive or post stupid shit without consequences.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
And guess what, the President has people to screen his mail for him - to BLOCK stupid people from wasting his time with stupid shit.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
I'm not on twitter. It took me exactly 15 seconds to search @realdonaldtrump on a search engine and pull up his Twitter account where I can read his inane babbling all day if I want. It's hard to take Trump's critics seriously when they keep whining about complete nonsense like this.
Considering the Trump administration's record on predicting what is and what is not legal, I'm pretty sure we're about to find out that there's a constitutional amendment from the 1800s that doesn't allow the President to block people on Twitter.
You are welcome on my lawn.
The Justice Department is powerless to tell the courts what they can, can't, or must, do.
A big part of presenting a position to a court is telling them what they can or can't do. They (and then the appellate courts) have to decide if you're right. You'd be amazed at what portion of legal matters in court involve decisions made by judges where they might rather do something else that might make more sense in a particular case, but they have limited power. In reality, while there are many judges from both sides of the aisle whom we may disagree with from time to time, this restraint is why the notion of the "activist judge" is basically a myth, especially at the federal level.
The courts defer to the executive or Congress on a wide variety of matters. Still, blocking a person prevents them from viewing your tweet and thus from interacting with it, which certainly limits that person's ability to comment on that tweet in a forum with thirty million plus people. It stretches credulity that you could convince a judge that a forum of thirty million people is anything other than a fully public forum, and free speech protections are at their zenith when talking about political matters in a public forum.
The blocked person may have ample alternative avenues for communication, but preventing them from commenting on the basis of their speech is still a content-based restraint on speech and IIRC is presumptively unconstitutional. Still, First Amendment doctrine is a bit labyrinthine and it would take a full briefing to lay out and evaluate the issue fully.
Real lawyers write in C++
Sounds to me like a business opportunity. Build a website whose sole purpose is to post all of Trump's Twitter posts, including those that are in reply to someone else's Twitter post, throw some ads on the site and wait for the money to start rolling in.
Then I am looking forward to my Congressional Rep not being allowed to block me on a whim.
While I don't call people names, etc. I can only imagine what my US House Rep's FB feed is gonna look like when she is required to leave stuff she doesn't like up there.
Caution: Contents under pressure
So the whitehouse staff is claiming that his 5am shitter tweets are official whitehouse policy.... but that his personal account is not official government documentation and thus subject to freedom of speech concerns?
Sorry guys, you cannot have it both ways, either its the depraved private musings of a senile old man on his own personal account
OR
It is official government documentation and policy announcements, and thus you cannot censor whom has access to reply.
The Courts have one job and only one job, to interpret the law.
That means that the administration has no business saying what the law is. That is entirely the Court's power.
So when they try to say what the court can and can not do, they are ALWAYS wrong. They expressly do not have the power or right to say what the law is.
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
When we got our own brand of fundamentalists, we also got the insanity that comes with the territory.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
People often forget, that for Freedom of Speech to be truely applied, listeners must have the right to decide what they wish to hear.
The lawsuit is basically saying that doesn't apply to the President, which is the opposite of their intent.
DaaaHHHHH! Warn me before yuo post that shti
Table-ized A.I.
AFAIK, Donald Trump is presently in control of *two* distinct twitter accounts.
First, his personal account, and second, the official whitehouse @POTUS account that a history check confirms was previously used by Barack Obama.
He uses both accounts for separate purposes. It's easy to argue that activity on his personal account has no bearing on his official position or actions as president.
Now, if Trump was blocking people from his presidential twitter, that would be a different ballgame.
When was the last time you were invited to a WH press briefing?
There's nothing to be solved. Blocking is a feature every Twitter user has. Why should Trump be singled out just because most of the country hates his guts?
We take the Internet too seriously sometimes. Web sites are games. Blocking people on Twitter is like a move in that game. Telling POTUS he can't block people is like telling he can't get crowned in a game of checkers.
Let's say that it is more serious though. Let's say Trump's account is like an open channel to the White House. Well, we've always been free to write an old fashioned letter to POTUS, and he's always been free to throw them in the trash, or direct staffers to filter them with certain criteria. It's not like POTUS has to carefully read every letter from every 2nd grade kid that writes. Sometimes he does, and that kid knows they won the lottery. There's just no other practical way for that to work.
So yeah, Trump, or any POTUS can block whoever he wants on a web site. That seem fairly cut and dry to me.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
This is the real meaning of covfefe. "You are all taking this far too srsly."
It all makes sense now.
How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
(ianal) As he uses it to communicate with the public, aka the american people, it's not being used for private purposes, it's being used for the office of the president of the united states. As such, that puts it in a whole different category. Everything he posts to it needs to be archived, and nobody that's an american citizen can be banned from it. Otherwise he's seriously screwing up and violating other rules and laws regarding POTUS.
Suppose Trump pardons the neo-nazi terrorist?
He's already claimed to have absolute pardoning powers...
Trump was, as usual, talking about himself.
-- sudon't
Air-ride Equipped
The problem here is that Trump is arbitrarily picking and choosing who has the capability to voice their grievances. I really don't see the courts approving of that. This could be resolved the same way corporations resolve these issues: establish a WH policy regarding access and enforce it, preferably independently, meaning Trump doesn't hit the block button himself. Simple example: If your messages approach the threshold of harassment as given for a public figure, then your account can be blocked. This would venture into unprotected speech, and blocking an account committing it would be reasonable. Although this could likely still get lawsuits in order to get a ruling on whether or not a block was reasonable in any given situation. Alternatively, he could resign, and block whoever he wants, that'd work too. Or delete his Twitter; another valid solution. Or hey, both would be great too.
...on Twitter. He blocks accounts on Twitter. It's an important distinction.
He can block me any time he wants!
HPD Ordered to Pay $31K over Censored Facebook Comments
http://www.hawaiifreepress.com...
Court Rules Against Politician Who Banned Access to Her Facebook Page
http://www.foxbusiness.com/fea...
"Grab them by the pussy" -- President of the United States of America
Only the Lefttarded would complain about not being able to read something that CAN BE READ BY EVERYONE THAT DOES NOT LOG IN!
Stupid snowflakes...
My rifles await your eradication from Earth!
This is a VERY dangerous thing!
Twitter is NOT an official communications channel to our leaders.
Consider that Trump has morphed his Twitter account as the means to (preach) to the constituency.
Reciprocity dictates that this is also where he would get feedback from that constituency.
VALUABLE feedback from the people he is serving is being ignored via this channel.
And, this valuable feedback is likely mostly lost as most would then not resort to the unblockable proper office channels.
To effectively deafen those he is supposed to be serving, he is effectively breaching his duties as a holder of an office "By the People, For the People"!
and effectively creating a DICTATORSHIP! Yet, presently, only on Twitter.
Trump is a CORPORATE business person.
It is obvious that Trump has NO clue how to be an ELECTED official to SERVE the people.
As a CEO, he has dictatorial powers. As a PUBLIC OFFICIAL, he has OBLIGATIONS to those he (is supposed to be) governing.
Get real, fellow citizens. His is ALLOWED to block anyone on Twitter.
Now that you have (mis-)spoken with your vote for him, if you want to be heard, then fucking say it thru the official office channels.
And next time, fucking vote for a truly COMPETENT candidate!
Self-importance and self-indulgence is the root of ALL evil.