Did Trump Violate the First Amendment by
Blocking People on Twitter? Clarence Thomas
Weighs In
PJ Media,
by
Tyler O´Neil
Original Article
Posted By: Dreadnought,
4/5/2021 11:09:54 PM
When President Donald Trump blocked users on Twitter, some of them sued, claiming the president had violated their First Amendment rights to speak in a public forum. On Monday, the Supreme Court dismissed that lawsuit as moot.
While the Court did not issue an opinion on the case, it stands to reason that Biden v. Knight First Amendment Institute (2021) would be moot because Trump is no longer in office and because Twitter has suspended Trump’s account. Justice Clarence Thomas wrote an important concurring opinion warning that the true threat to free speech did not involve Trump but Twitter.
In 2019, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals held that the comment threads
Reply 1 - Posted by:
Dreadnought 4/5/2021 11:10:28 PM (No. 745871)
Justice Thomas's response was a legal roadmap containing a fork in the road and instructions to take it.
43 people like this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
itsonlyme 4/5/2021 11:19:29 PM (No. 745875)
The head Communist at Twitter is Jack Dorsey.
He has many disciples at Twitter that serve to please him.
49 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
GoodDeal 4/6/2021 12:12:17 AM (No. 745890)
At this point what difference does it make. Trump probably blocked them because they were rude insulting disrespectful loathsome vile Aholes. Good for him and F them they deserved it.
78 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
Highlander 4/6/2021 1:11:25 AM (No. 745908)
For those users, who were blocked by Trump, to sue him is nothing less than capricious harassment. They just wanted to make Trump’s life difficult. They had no more right to sue him any than some spammer has to sue me for using a block on my iPhone.
54 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
OBX Pete 4/6/2021 3:21:42 AM (No. 745934)
At least we know that we have one member of the supreme court who is honest and not afraid to state his thoughts on each case.
Thank you justice Clarence Thomas...........we need other justices who are not afraid to follow the constitution in their rulings.
74 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
4Justice 4/6/2021 5:51:08 AM (No. 745956)
He blocked them from his account. That is not a First Amendment issue. These weirdo leftists will twist and manipulate EVERYTHING to fit their agenda for control.
53 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
5 handicap 4/6/2021 5:54:40 AM (No. 745957)
#5 I don't believe any of the other 8 give a damn about the Constitution...only in who's pocket, they can reach.
32 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
Kafka2 4/6/2021 6:49:51 AM (No. 745982)
By Twitter suspending President Trump's Twitter account they established that it was not a public forum. If it was a public forum then Twitter, a private company, had ultimate control. Thus, it was not a public forum per the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. This last part got clipped in the write-up.
18 people like this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
Krause 4/6/2021 7:02:19 AM (No. 745984)
The worst people in the world want to control you. It's obvious why.
20 people like this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
Hermit_Crab 4/6/2021 7:21:35 AM (No. 745997)
Well, anyone who sues on the grounds that Trump violated the First Amendment by blocking them on Twitter, then they should also sue Twitter (And Facebook, and YouTube) not only for the tens of millions of times that they have deleted posts and banned people who said things they don't like, but also for providing the tool whereby President Trump (and anyone else ) who deleted posts or blocked people on their account .
Without that tool provided by the platform infrastructure, then the feed holder couldn't block them.
23 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
MickTurn 4/6/2021 8:25:40 AM (No. 746050)
IF blocking someone from your account is a violation of the First Amendment then Twitter is in violation of the Law for providing a capability to block others. Personally I do NOT do Twit, Fakebook, or any other of the Communist Big Tech games. I don't have the time and WILL NOT participate in their crooked actions!
12 people like this.
Reply 12 - Posted by:
Lawsy0 4/6/2021 8:50:38 AM (No. 746089)
Isn't this just a whole lotta ''inside baseball'' or else what's the point? I know it was all in English, but it was still hard to understand.
3 people like this.
Reply 13 - Posted by:
Rumblehog 4/6/2021 9:23:36 AM (No. 746126)
No, those morons he blocked had violated HIS "Terms of Use"... hmmm, where have I heard that before?? Oh yeah, it's what Twitter said when they shut off President Trump's account entirely.
11 people like this.
#12 - It's really not hard to understand. These social media platforms control their content. (Read the Terms of Service small print.) They are private entities, like a newspaper or your own business. They have the right to do so. People who use their "free" services are accounts. They can control access to their accounts by choices they make. PDT blocked certain parties. It was his personal account, although argument can be made that his account is a "government" account as a Presidential communication channel.
The government cannot "control" speech under 1A in a public forum. These social media try to play both sides: They are a public forum for some benefits, and a private platform for protections. The point Justice Thomas is making is that THEY control access, thus PDT was not truly in control of his own account, and as such Twitter assumed a role in this drama by booting him. The unanswered question is whether Twitter could be held to have violated PDT's 1A rights...and Thomas seems to be spoiling for the fight.
7 people like this.
Reply 15 - Posted by:
red1066 4/6/2021 9:43:00 AM (No. 746172)
Doesn't everyone with a twitter account have the ability to block people? Didn't twitter itself block Trump, and why all of a sudden are the communists interested in the Contitution?
9 people like this.
Reply 16 - Posted by:
hershey 4/6/2021 9:56:00 AM (No. 746184)
Damn people...it's ok to block Trump, no violation there, but it's not ok for Trump to block anyone...up is down and down is up, right is wrong and wrong is right...what a screwed up society we live in.
9 people like this.
Reply 17 - Posted by:
stablemoney 4/6/2021 10:45:41 AM (No. 746246)
When are we going to get a ruling about Jack Dorsey blocking accounts on Twitter?
6 people like this.
Reply 18 - Posted by:
tsquare 4/6/2021 11:24:30 AM (No. 746302)
First amendment restricts congressional action, trump,was not and is not congress.
2 people like this.
Reply 19 - Posted by:
Zigrid 4/6/2021 11:37:31 AM (No. 746319)
Well folks... at least WE have one justice that follows the constitution....twitter has lost many customers and Rush had Dorsey named right... he is Rasputin... the evil Russian that caused the collapse of the Romanoff family...looks like....heee's back!!
3 people like this.
Reply 20 - Posted by:
Marzipan4 4/6/2021 11:51:16 AM (No. 746342)
So the self entitled must be allowed to harass you. Uhhhhm, nope
3 people like this.
Reply 21 - Posted by:
Marzipan4 4/6/2021 11:52:54 AM (No. 746346)
It’s free speech. Listening is not mandatory
3 people like this.
Reply 22 - Posted by:
little guy 4/6/2021 1:08:25 PM (No. 746437)
Just another Trump harassment suit that finally bites the dust. It only got this far because of the constant appeals. What Trump did is no different than you or me blocking a phone call coming into our houses by using caller I.D.
The real question is under what authority does Twitter or Facebook get to block conservatives?
PS: In all fairness, Thomas and Alito are both fairly conservative. Justice Alito did not opine as he didn't have to.
2 people like this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "Dreadnought"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)