Judge Orders Trump to Stop Blocking Twitter Users

[UNM1136]

I completely agree with this ruling. Donald Trump uses twitter as a forum to air his thoughts and policy. He should not be able to limit the viewing of this material, I mean for fucks sake it is supposed to be recorded by the library of congress.

As I recall Obama had to give up his blackberry so that his texts and emails could be archived, and the whole HRC affair involves the use of a private server and non-govermental cell phones to get around the archiving laws. Since Trump is an employee of the American electorate, I am totally OK with our elected representatives creating a law that keeps POTUS off of twitter, or twitter can decide to stop giving him a venue in the interest of archival of presidental statements. Either of those would be great, but not likely to happen. The ruling would be spot on if twitter were a goverment informational utility, or if it cited twitter as stepping around the federal archiving requirements.

Whether I like it or not he is taking advantage of a legal service provided by a private company. There are mechanisms available to fix it, but I don't see any of the capable parties having the spine to take a stand. My only real problem with the ruling is the minor flaw it seems to be based on, which as we all know as pistol shooters is a small error at the muzzle results in a drastic miss downrange. I very frequently see small flaws, when accepted as fact, balloon into huge, nearly insurmountable legal obsticles, like the current trends in DWI caselaw. Locally theTorres decision is 20 years old, and not a single prosecutor statewide has been able to come up with an arguement that makes admissable our most accurate, least intrusive sobriety test, that is admissible in every other state of the union. All because a clever defense attorney made a convincing argument the science needed to be ignored without expert testimony explaining the neurological/opthamological causes behind an observable effect of alcohol in the bloodstream at a specific concentration. BUT the other two tests, using the same science, does not need expert testimony to explain the observable effects alcohol has while in the bloodstream and are admissable, while being less accurate, and requiring more from the suspect. The Torres decision is widely regarded as bad caselaw, but has yet to be overturned.

The largest problem with minor flaws in legal decision comes well downstream of the decision itself. Unintended consequences and such.

pat

[Rex G]

I knew that birds twittered. The President twitters? Is he a bird?

[Trooper224]

Trump, acting as the POTUS, has chosen to use twitter as a public forum thereby negating any rights he has as a private citizen in that context. Good ruling.

[BehindBlueI's]

Yeah, no. The government didn't create the twitter venue. It is wholly owned by a private company who can delete any account for any reason, or no reason at all.

But that applies to basically all media in the US. We don't really have an equivalent to BBC. Newspapers, broadcast tv, etc.

I think the argument isn't that Twitter could delete it and then nobody have access. He could stop tweeting tomorrow and that's fine. But as long as he is tweeting, anyone who wants to be able to read it should be able to, since he's discussing policy with it.

[hufnagel]

So, question: does this apply to both twitter accounts he uses (@POTUS and @realDonaldTrump) or just the POTUS one? I can see the argument of blocking as being for (@realDonaldTrump) and against (@POTUS), as one is personal and one is public.

[UNM1136]

Maybe you guys are right...but a couple of things still gnaw. Broadcast media are private companies, who nearly sell their souls for access to heavily federally regulated public air waves. Print media much less so until shipped by USPS. Cable is regulated like a utility...

I could be conflating issues, but I still doubt the same judge would rule that twitter has to provide a First Amendment platform for an unpopular private citizen. Is there a slippery slope here? Are congress critters in the same boat discussing policy? Prolly not. Political appointees? How about candidates? To what political level? I still think the participants in a free market are better placed to decide this.

The aggrieved parties are still receiving his tweets; my local news has a segment of every broadcast every day to broadcast every tweet he sends. I just checked and Google gets you his feed. I am not a twitter guy but it took me less than a minute to find and read and bookmark and unbookmark his feed without logging in or even having a twitter account myself. What am I missing?

His ego won't allow this but how nice would it be for Trump to pout and refuse to tweet any more?

Maybe I am not as informed on this as I thought I was.

pat

[JodyH]

This ruling should also apply to ALL elected officials talking politics on Twitter, facebook, YouTube...
This will unleash some epic trolling of everybody from the city council to Senators, SCOTUS judges and the POTUS.

If this ruling stands it will be the end of social media as a political tool... which will be freaking awesome for conservatives.

[Chance]

But as long as he is tweeting, anyone who wants to be able to read it should be able to, since he's discussing policy with it.

They can still read them, you just have to log out of the service first. Being able to get your responses seen is evidently the crux of the matter, if I'm understanding this correctly.

[BehindBlueI's]

They can still read them, you just have to log out of the service first. Being able to get your responses seen is evidently the crux of the matter, if I'm understanding this correctly.

No, it says he can mute people so their response isn't seen. Just not block so they can't see his. Unless I'm not understanding it.

if Trump's goal were merely to get annoying users to stop bothering him, he could accomplish that goal just as well using the mute button. This button prevents tweets from muted accounts from showing up in Trump's timeline and notifications, but it doesn't prevent muted users from replying to and retweeting Trump's tweets. The fact that Trump chose to block users instead suggests that his goal was to prevent them from communicating with others.

[Drang]

This ruling should also apply to ALL elected officials talking politics on Twitter, facebook, YouTube...
This will unleash some epic trolling of everybody from the city council to Senators, SCOTUS judges and the POTUS.

If this ruling stands it will be the end of social media as a political tool... which will be freaking awesome for conservatives.

I was just going to post:
Just the President, or any elected official?
Just Federal, or at all levels?
Just elected, or appointed as well?
How about hired?