A federal appeals court upheld a previous ruling that President Donald Trump engaged in unconstitutional discrimination by blocking dissenters on Twitter.
Manhattan’s 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals this week agreed that as long as Trump is a public official, he cannot prevent people from reading or responding to his feed simply because he disagrees with them.
In July 2017, the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University—on behalf of seven individuals blocked by Trump after criticizing his policies—sued the president.
The suit claimed that Trump’s Twitter account (@realDonaldTrump) is a public forum and official voice of the administration, and that excluding people from accessing it is a First Amendment violation.
Former White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer and White House Director of Social Media Daniel Scavino were also named in the lawsuit.
Almost a year later, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York held that the president’s Twitter account constitutes a “public forum,” and therefore cannot bar speakers on the basis of viewpoint.
Some 75 users have since been unblocked, though another 30 or so remain stonewalled—including model Chrissy Teigen and comedian Rosie O’Donnell, the Associated Press reported.
“Public officials’ social media accounts are now among the most significant forums for discussion of government policy,” Jameel Jaffer, the Knight Institute’s executive director, said in a statement.
“This decision will ensure that people aren’t excluded from these forums simply because of their viewpoints,” the attorney continued. “And that public officials aren’t insulated from their constituents’ criticism.”
Evidence of the official nature of Trump’s Twitter account—first created in 2009, now operating in tandem with the @POTUS feed—is “overwhelming.”
“Once the president has chosen a platform and opened up its interactive space to millions of users and participants, he may not selectively exclude those whose views he disagrees with,” according to the unanimous judgement.
The Department of Justice is understandably disappointed by the ruling. After all, it has now lost for a second time in a row.
“As we argued, President Trump’s decision to block users from his personal Twitter account does not violate the First Amendment,” spokesperson Kelly Laco told the Associated Press.
There is no word on whether the government will appeal again—by asking the panel to reconsider, or seeking a reversal from the full 2nd Circuit or the U.S. Supreme Court.
“The irony in all of this is that we write at a time in the history of this nation when the conduct of our government and its officials is subject to wide-open, robust debate,” Circuit Judge Barrington Parker wrote on behalf of the three-judge panel.
“This debate, as uncomfortable and as unpleasant as it frequently may be, is nonetheless a good thing,” he continued. “In resolving this appeal, we remind the litigants and the public that if the First Amendment means anything, it means that the best response to disfavored speech on matters of public concern is more speech, not less.”
Twitter last month introduced a new “notice” feature that hides abusive posts by verified government officials with more than 100,000 followers.
(Trump’s personal and professional accounts both qualify.)
Employees will determine what content is a matter of public interest based on certain considerations, including the immediacy and severity of potential harm, as well as whether the tweet provides unique context or perspective necessary to broader discussion.
Concealed posts will not be featured as top tweets on a user’s timeline, or in “safe search” results, “recommended tweet” push notifications, or the “Explore” page.
More on Geek.com:
- Twitter On the Hunt for ‘Tweeter in Chief’
- Twitter Bug ‘Accidentally’ Exposed iOS Users’ Location Data to Third Party
- Twitter Now Lets You Add GIFs, Photos, Videos to Retweets
