MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: granting in part and denying in part 34 Motion for Summary Judgment; granting in part and denying in part 42 Motion for Summary Judgment. We conclude that we have jurisdiction to entertain this dispute. Plaintiffs have established legal injuries that are traceable to the conduct of the President and Daniel Scavino and, despite defendants' suggestions to the contrary, their injuries are redressable by a favorable judicial declaration. Plaintiffs lack standing, however, to sue Sarah Huckabee Sanders, who is dismissed as a defendant. Hope Hicks is also dismissed as a defendant, in light of her resignation as White House Communications Director. Turning to the merits of plaintiffs' First Amendment claim, we hold that the speech in which they seek to engage is protected by the First Amendment and that the President and Scavino exert governmental control over certain aspects of the @realDonaldTrump account, including the interactive space of the tweets sent from the account. That interactive space is susceptible to analysis under the Supreme Court's forum doctrines, and is properly characterized as a designated public forum. The viewpoint-based exclusion of the individual plaintiffs from that designated public forum is proscribed by the First Amendment and cannot be justified by the President's personal First Amendment interests. In sum, defendants' motion for summary judgment is granted in part and denied in part, and plaintiffs' cross-motion for summary judgment is granted in part and denied in part. The Clerk of the Court is directed to terminate the motions pending at docket entries 34 and 42. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald on 5/23/2018) (ama) (Entered: 05/23/2018)
The jewdicial system strikes again. How will zion Don ever recover
Joshua Bennett
Appeal that shit up to SCOTUS
Jayden Jenkins
Good first step, now they have to apply the same ruling to twitter itself. Of course, as sweet as it sounds, it's intention is of course just to feed don with as many liberal shitbots as possible again, to distort any possible contact with the RIGHT-WING base as much as possible, it is left to see how much the don can make this backfire.
Brayden Robinson
I'd rather see it stand and media sites in general become public forums where no one can be censored tbh.
Jonathan Davis
He he he he he he. Ho ho ho ho ho ho. Sage because this "victory" is so fucking shallow I fail to see how this is news. Yeah, someone might try to slippery slope this to make it "legal" to force a politician into spilling state secrets, but considering how the Muh Russia Impeach Now narrative is going I have extreme doubts of anyone going far with this ruling.
Matthew Sanchez
Twitter has to unban/unsuspend everyone now so they can see POTUS tweets kek.
Imagine the Dunning-Kruger effect in an entire group of people and now make those people legally protected from criticism. jews are such parasites it boggles the rational mind.
Eli Diaz
Reminder that Trump may ban anyone he wants to ban and that this is a false ruling.
No, that's not even remotely the case. Twitter isn't the government or a government official. They don't have to do anything. They DO, however, have to restore the accounts of ANYONE running for public office. It is a felony for them to censor public officials
Dylan Phillips
You heard it here first, boys. It's unconstitutional for a public servant to prevent a person from expressing their views to them. Go to their offices, the stages from which they're delivering speeches, anywhere you god damn like, it is unconstitutional to remove you and for them to not hear you. The First Amendment is now, apparently, not sufficient in regards to you being able to speak, for instance, on your own Twitter feed, you have the right to be heard directly by a public servant and it cannot be violated on the basis of differing views.
Anthony Jackson
So that SJW that blocked all users (by deleting Trump's Twitter account purposefully on her last day at work) is now up for serious prosecution, or the law only works one-way still?
Isaiah Cook
They're basically the 9th Circuit, SCOTUS will BTFO this shit ruling
Dominic White
Twitter violates the ruling by not allowing it's users to engage with public officials when they are suspended/banned. You can say NO all you want but this case opens a whole 'nother can of worms.
Charles Wilson
This is fucking retarded. Obnoxious people that spam the president are now going to get unblocked and allowed to spam without regard. I doubt twitter will ban them. They took away the president's individual freedom. They took away the president's freedom of expression by removing his ability to express his wish to ignore people who he doesnt want to hear. He isnt censoring anyone.
I hope Trump does what he does best and flips it around, hopefully shitting hard on twitter and killing it.
Aiden Martin
The constitution prohibits ex post facto laws. If something becomes illegal you can't be charged for the act when it was legal. If eating pork was outlawed tomorrow you couldn't be charged with eating a nice big pork chop yesterday.
Jace Phillips
You better tell that to Patrick Little, he's had plenty of accounts deleted
Charles James
user, court rulings never work both ways simultaneously.
Henry Stewart
This is absolutely brilliant
Hudson Ramirez
But it's like that already? Or at least it is supposed to be. All this ruling does is remind everyone of their rights when communicating with government officials, so good going for them I guess. They sure showed mean ol' Drumpf once and for all.
Evan Mitchell
You speak as if things never change.
Nolan Mitchell
See my post here for a better solution where Twitter itself can't suspend the shitposter account:
Jordan Lewis
checked
Evan Roberts
Well, yeah. It has nothing to do with this ruling, but there's a law on the books that prevents any broadcaster from denying equal access, equal air time, and equal REDUCED PRICING for said access to anyone running for office. That applies to "broadcasters" like social media.
Nope, just as if there's a pretense of the rule of law existing. Delude yourself all you want; it doesn't work both ways here.
Blake Price
All it takes is a proper case with the right judge who rules in accordance with this ruling.
Isaiah Long
I have a feeling paying off the right judges is going to come into play soon for both sides to get whatever they want passed.
Brandon Nelson
Does that mean all public officials must have their block ability removed on their twitter account? I can't wait to see how Twitter is going to handle this. And all those sweet sweet tears that will once again flow due to Democrat officials twitter feeds getting flooded with Zig Forums memes.
Step 1) run for literally any office Step 2) use Twitter as your campaign platform Step 3) shitpost and redpill to your hearts content Step 4) get comfy
Parker Robinson
Maybe I'm retarded, but isn't the obvious way for the "other team" to circumvent this simply to have their politicians not block people (after all, they have no right to under this), but to have Twitter ban/block based off of breaking their ToS? I'm not sure about 's post, so I can't give a deeper thought on the matter.
Carson Martin
I feel it has very little to do with a payoff and more to do with, as this judge has ruled, ones constitutional right to engage with public officials via social media. There is coming a day when twitter/facebook etc etc will no longer be allowed to censor people for their politic postings and this case is paving the road for that.
Was read incorrectly, it's just some literal who but the point stands.
Gabriel Evans
So another Obama appointee? then you better tell twitter to remove the block option then you little shits.
Levi Rogers
I notice it states, "…in response to the political views that person has expressed…" This does not mean he can't block you due to harassment, vile language, or bot-posting. And I guarantee libtards can't stay away from such things.
Easton King
I mean if you want a ruling to go your way, you simply get a judge, he or she makes the ruling and there you go, its cemented unless someone takes it higher. This entire thing is retarded. Its a private owned thing. This is dangerous because lets say we want to remove certain liberal shits from our own websites, soon people will make the links and then I or others will have to allow degenerates on our site due to their leanings.
Jonathan Collins
Clinton apparently.
Dylan Martinez
also depending on the seat being sought there may be less regulations / rules on who can run. basically if this ruling sets any precedent every single person should run for multiple offices just for free speech protections to shitpost
Michael Harris
This'll be interesting considering anti-semiticism, or at least nationalism/nazism is considered a political viewpoint. Therefore, technically, it can't be blocked (after all, no one would dare to claim being an natsoc is separate from being anti-semetic, otherwise the standard card to paint nazis as evil jew killers goes the window).
Anthony Hall
It's a publicly traded company.
Ryder Taylor
The Internet sure moves at impressive speeds. Hopefully this ends up as another court case.
And our rabid anti-antisemitism would scare almost all of them away, which it already does. You say this on a board that wants to make the fire rise and laugh at the chaos. I want an Internet with "Wild West" tier free speech.
Nathaniel Reyes
Trump uses his personal account, not the one of the president (@potus)
Connor Rivera
Yep. Just keep those memes clean and civil, and they can't block them at all, unless they want you to sue them.
Christopher Morales
Which 8ch is not.
Brandon Kelly
btw
President Trump Retweeted The White House Verified account @WhiteHouse 44m44 minutes ago
Too many innocent Americans have fallen victim to the unthinkable violence of MS-13’s animals. President Trump is fighting back to secure the safety of the American people.
TOP KEK
Brody Diaz
Fuck off Littledick.
Ethan Barnes
zionism?
Benjamin Nelson
Good luck. We wont have that ever again with everyone and their grandma able to use the internet now. That got ruined with cell phones.
Robert Davis
Nope. Not paying attention to auto-correct.
Nolan Barnes
The constitution supposedly prevents a lot of things yet they still do them.
Isaac Moore
He's not preventing users from viewing his tweets, they can just log out and view them anonymously. This is pure kikery.
Mason Thomas
Fair point. Just noting that it's illegal if they ever try that kind of bullshit.
Zachary Hall
Blocking users prevents them from talking to the account, which is the issue claimed as suppression of free speech. But, as other anons point out, this goes both ways and sets a precedent for politically themed shitposting onto Liberal politician accounts.
Jason Bennett
It was done for kike reasons, yes. But this could very well end in the soft nationalization of (((social media)))
I highly doubt this standard is going to go both ways. But we can hope, I suppose.
Christian Gray
Court's rules. I'm sure they'll try the good ol' double standard anyway. So hang them with their own words.
Landon Nelson
It's inevitable. Like the freedom of association making a comeback after a judge ruled that a bar had the right to kick out a man wearing a MAGA hat. They're bringing this on themselves.
Charles King
Has anyone used that association standard to kick any niggers or fags out?
What if I call Maxine Waters a stupid nigger and they ban me? Can I argue in court that Twitter is violating my First Amendment rights?
Levi Scott
Based under the precedent set by the case, only if you can prove that statement to one of your political beliefs (and give it a solid case that it isn't anything else).
Carter Young
No, because this ruling has absolutely fucking nothing to do with anyone's account.
Jeremiah Cook
So now we can have a class action lawsuit against twatter for blocking everyone who isn't a SJW? This case sets precedent, they violated our constitutional rights and must be taken down accordingly.
Colton Perry
Kill yourself moshe, no one is falling for your bullshit.
Carson Garcia
I believe the 13th was a mistake. How's that?
Ayden Cox
Not even remotely close to what it says.
Nicholas Anderson
I believe that'd work for things such as not calling her a citizen (or phrases such as "go back to Africa/Libera"), however, since "nigger" is just an insult it's hard to give it a logical grounding for being from a political view. At best, you could call her an animal since, potentially, you could argue that your political views encompass not viewing blacks, who you view as a different sub-species from whites due to their genetic distance, as not "people."
Hunter Bailey
This is a jew.
Caleb Rodriguez
We were denied access to our political officials, moshe. It is very much what it says.
Jacob Barnes
Are you calling me a jew for telling you how it'd go down in an actual court in the modern judicial/jewdial system?
You don't understand, if they force DRONALD BLUMPF to see all the courageous blue checkmarks tweeting snarky shit at him every time he says something he will step down and hand over the presidency to Hillary "YASS SLAY QUEEN" Clinton in a few weeks. Speak truth to power!
What would be the proper way to sue these kikes upon being banned?
Julian Reed
Trump has been using his Twitter to sidestep the kike media and engage directly with the public. The kike response to this was to send in waves of paid shills to be disruptive and try to hamper Trump's ability to avoid their controlled channels. Trump, of course, responded by just blocking the retards. This is an attempt to try and restrict Trump's ability to communicate without them gatekeeping in some regard.
Samuel Harris
Justice Department is telling the judge to get fucked.
Does this mean Twitter will stop shadow banning (((hate speech)))?
Colton Robinson
Sadly, no. I think it'll take a major legal violation before they come down no Twatter. Remember Mark Zuckerberg's trial.
Aiden Cook
The retarded cunt didn't even want to enforce the law on Trump this was just done for good goy points and virtue signalling. Nevertheless she is going to get shit on by the DOJ. This is great. Shit is already backfiring spectactularly and it could open the way to more 'didagreements' between Trump's DOJ and whatever retarded niggerjudges are keeping DACA in an artificial coma and throwing shit in his way.
Its my political belief that blacks are niggers. I'm not a protected class on twitter.
Parker Ward
***now a protected class
Kayden Peterson
And what happens if he mutes someone? These idiots did not think this through.
Hudson Thompson
THIS JUST IN IT'S IMPOSSIBLE FOR PUBLIC OFFICIALS IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO BLOCK EVIL NAZIS ON TWITTER If you have a Twatter account it's time to show them your favorite symbols.
