"Knight's First Amendment Institute" sued Trump for… blocking twitter users!

[1MGTOWSpectator 301]

Columbia University’s Knight First Amendment Institute is suing Donald Trump for blocking people on Twitter, claiming that it violates free speech protections. The institute filed suit today on behalf of seven Twitter users who were blocked by the president, which prevents them from seeing or replying to his tweets. It threatened legal action in a letter to Trump in June, and now “asks the court to declare that the viewpoint-based blocking of people from the @realDonaldTrump account is unconstitutional.”

The lawsuit, which was filed in the Southern District of New York, elaborates on the Knight Institute’s earlier letter. It contends that Trump’s Twitter account is a public political forum where citizens have a First Amendment right to speak. Under this theory, blocking users impedes their right to participate in a political conversation and stops them from viewing official government communication. Therefore, if Trump blocks people for criticizing his political viewpoints, he’d be doing the equivalent of kicking them out of a digital town hall.

(Click for more)

This is so hillarious! Of course they will fail, you can’t win a lawsuit because you were blocked on a social media website. Trump did the right thing of blocking some Twitter users. I often read Trump’s official account on Twitter, and verified liberals were posting insulting replies to presidents’ tweets. Not only insulitng him, but also his family. Libtards have lost control! They just can’t deal with the fact that Trump is their president!

[TaxGuyParticipant]

Wouldn’t it make sense then if they sued Twitter for having a block feature at all? Shouldn’t they sue Apple for making a phone that allows you to not pick up a call? Shouldn’t they sue the TV makers for having a “mute” button? You know, free speech and all. Trump is STILL speaking after those people are blocked, so exactly how is Trump’s free speech being limited. The first amendment gives Donald Trump to right to free speech, it doesn’t you the right to hear it.

OK, seriously. Make up a new fake account and follow him again. Problem solved. And then don’t be an asshole and get blocked again. But if you do, make up a new fake account and follow him again.

I think you know where I’m going with this….

Order the good wine

[Faust For ScienceParticipant 22595]

1MGTOW wrote:

The lawsuit, which was filed in the Southern District of New York, elaborates on the Knight Institute’s earlier letter.

Judge shopping to file in court should be a federal felony.

[1MGTOWSpectator 301]

TaxGuy wrote:

OK, seriously. Make up a new fake account and follow him again. Problem solved. And then don’t be an asshole and get blocked again. But if you do, make up a new fake account and follow him again.

But this is what they want. They don’t just want to follow him. What they want is to offend him. They’re gonna be assholes either way.

[SolidParticipant 7520]

When people are SO SENSITIVE that they CRY LIKE THAT FOR JUST GET BLOCKED !
OMG, what would be from those poor guys if they have real problems in life to deal with ?

Seriously, this kind of people have no limits !

[FrostByteParticipant 19005]

You think anyone who called themselves the “Knight’s First Amendment Institute” would have enough brains to read the laws before spending lots of money on an obvious failure. Their free speech is not impeded. All they lost was their platform that is privately owned and operated by an individual AKA D. Trump.

If they did win (and this is the real stupid part) they would not be able to block the multitudes of trolls ready to flood their social platforms. They are basically suing to take away their own freedom. Face-palm.

If you rescue a damsel in distress, all you will get is a distressed damsel.

[GetaPoasParticipant 73]

Trump is an individual, an individual blocking you is a lot different than a blatant ban. I do hope this incites a discussion the United States and frankly the rest of the f~~~ing world should’ve had 15 years ago.

Legal personhood online.

This determines everything in regards to how we interact online. I’m not gonna get into freeze peach, I don’t f~~~ing care… I just want governments to acknowledge either we are or are not persons online.

If we are, than we shouldn’t be getting banned. Anywhere… for any reason. Reddit, 4chan, Facebook, whatever. The problem than becomes as legal persons we are individually responsible for the content we post and whether or not that could be construed as harassment, defacement, violence, etc. I can see the liberal lawyers boners from here.

If we AREN’T persons online, which seems like the betting man’s bid given how capitalism operates… than yes, we can be banned, however than all the darkest reaches of the internet like zippo cat, child porn, terrorist propaganda… it’s just too friggin bad. It’s out there, nothing can be done about it and noone is to blame. At BEST, you could blame the admins and moderators that run a website given as the property holder it’d be like if someone cooked a meth lab in my apartment complex. Technically that becomes my liability as it was my job to take better care of my apartment and you know… not let meth-heads f~~~ing run a meth-lab.

But given what crybabies Reddit and 4chan be, I don’t see them striving for the latter option or willing to suck it up like adults the former option. Hence why you have this legal Purgatory where they love to scream IT’S A PRIVATE HOUSEHOLD buuuut, don’t take that to it’s natural end result.

Europe has made up it’s mind to some extent. It’s basically pointing a gun to the back of social media moderators to force them to weedout Isamophobia. I just imagine some cuck mod typing away deleting hundreds, thousands of posts and banning accounts as his hands are bleeding crying “THIS WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A POWER TRIP! MY HIGH IS COMING DOOOWWWNNNN ; _ ;”

Heheheh…

[Author]

Posts