Jump to content

Knight First Amendment Institute v. Trump

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Fabrickator (talk | contribs) at 00:37, 13 August 2018 (replace NY Times links with unrestricted archive.is links). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Knight First Amendment Institute v. Trump
CourtUnited States District Court for the Southern District of New York
Full case name Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University; Rebecca Buckwalter; Philip Cohen; Holly Figueroa; Eugene Gu; Brandon Neely; Joseph Papp; and Nicholas Pappas, Plaintiffs, v. Donald J. Trump, President of the United States; Sean M. Spicer, White House Press Secretary; and Daniel Scavino, White House Director of Social Media and Assistant to the President, Defendants.
DecidedMay 23, 2018
DefendantsDonald Trump
Sean Spicer
Daniel Scavino
PlaintiffsKnight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University
Rebecca Buckwalter
Philip Cohen
Holly Figueroa
Eugene Gu
Brandon Neely
Joseph Papp
Nicholas Pappas
CitationNo. 1:17-cv-05205

Knight First Amendment Institute v. Trump (1:17-cv-05205) is a lawsuit filed on July 11, 2017 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York and decided May 23, 2018. The plaintiffs are a group of Twitter users blocked by U.S. President Donald Trump's personal @realDonaldTrump account. They allege that this account constitutes a public forum, and that blocking access to it is a violation of their First Amendment rights. The lawsuit also names as defendants White House press secretary Sean Spicer and social media director Dan Scavino.[1][2][3][4][5]

The plaintiffs are represented by the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, which itself is a plaintiff in the case.[1][2][3] Though the Knight Institute's Twitter account has not been blocked by Trump,[6] the lawsuit argues that they and other followers of the @realDonaldTrump Twitter account "are now deprived of their right to read the speech of the dissenters who have been blocked".[7] The complaint also argues that posts to the @realDonaldTrump account are "official statements".[8]

Background

On Twitter, blocked users cannot see or respond to tweets from the account that blocked them. As of July 2017, the @realDonaldTrump Twitter account had 33.7 million followers.[9][10] Trump's tweets are often retweeted tens of thousands of times, and Trump frequently uses Twitter to make policy statements.[11] In June 2017, Spicer stated that Trump's tweets are considered "official statements by the president of the United States". In July 2017, Trump tweeted that his use of social media is "MODERN DAY PRESIDENTIAL".[9][10] Another lawsuit, CREW and National Security Archive v. Trump and EOP was filed in the District of Columbia, alleging violations of the Presidential Records Act for deleting tweets.

A month prior to filing this lawsuit, the Knight Institute had sent a letter to Trump on behalf of two of the blocked Twitter users, asking that they and other blocked users have their accounts unblocked by Trump. The letter argued that Trump's personal Twitter account is a public forum, and that it is therefore unconstitutional to exclude dissenting views. The letter was copied to Spicer, Scavino, and White House counsel Don McGahn.[2][12] The Trump administration has not responded to the letter.[7]

Analysis and criticism

In response to critics who question whether Twitter should be considered a public forum, Knight Institute senior attorney Katie Fallow cited a June 19, 2017 U.S. Supreme Court decision, Packingham v. North Carolina, in which Justice Anthony Kennedy described social media as "the modern public square" and as one of the most important places for the exchange of views. The ruling, which was unanimous, struck down a North Carolina law that prohibited registered sex offenders from accessing social media sites.[1]

Latest developments

The Complaint was filed July 11, 2017.[4] The Plaintiffs' reply was filed on December 1, 2017.[13] Oral arguments were heard before Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald on March 9, 2018.[14]

On May 23, 2018, Buchwald issued a declaratory judgment, ruling that Trump blocking people on Twitter is unconstitutional on First Amendment grounds. The court ruled that the @realDonaldTrump Twitter account is "a presidential account as opposed to a personal account", and blocking people from it violates their rights to participate in a "designated public forum".[15] Buchwald introduced the decision by writing:

This case requires us to consider whether a public official may, consistent with the First Amendment, “block” a person from his Twitter account in response to the political views that person has expressed, and whether the analysis differs because that public official is the President of the United States. The answer to both questions is no.[16]

Recently, the Knight First Amendment Institute asked Facebook to be allowed to set up fake accounts.[17]

See also

References

  1. ^ a b c Wong, Julia Carrie (July 11, 2017). "Twitter users sue Donald Trump for blocking them over critical comments". The Guardian. Retrieved July 11, 2017.
  2. ^ a b c Savage, Charlie (July 11, 2017). "Twitter Users Blocked by Trump File Lawsuit". The New York Times. Archived from the original on July 12, 2017. Retrieved August 12, 2018. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
  3. ^ a b Neumeister, Larry (July 11, 2017). "Trump sued for blocking some of his critics on Twitter". The Washington Post. Associated Press. Retrieved July 11, 2017.
  4. ^ a b Knight First Amendment Institute (July 11, 2017). "COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF" (PDF). Retrieved July 12, 2017.
  5. ^ Brannon, Valerie C. (June 5, 2018). UPDATE: Sidewalks, Streets, and Tweets: Is Twitter a Public Forum? (PDF). Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service. Retrieved June 14, 2018.
  6. ^ Abramson, Alana (July 11, 2017). "Donald Trump Blocked These People on Twitter. Now They're Suing Him". Time. Retrieved July 11, 2017.
  7. ^ a b Sumagaysay, Levi (July 11, 2017). "Trump sued by people he blocked on Twitter". The Mercury News. Retrieved July 11, 2017.
  8. ^ Heilweil, Rebecca (July 11, 2017). "Trump Violates First Amendment With Every Twitter User He Blocks, Lawsuit Contends". Forbes. Retrieved July 12, 2017.
  9. ^ a b Blunden, Mark (July 12, 2017). "Donald Trump sued for blocking people on Twitter". Evening Standard. Retrieved July 12, 2017.
  10. ^ a b Pestano, Andrew V. (July 12, 2017). "Advocates sue Trump for blocking Twitter users". UPI. Retrieved July 12, 2017.
  11. ^ Volz, Dustin (July 11, 2017). "U.S. free-speech group sues Trump for blocking Twitter users". Reuters. Retrieved July 12, 2017.
  12. ^ Savage, Charlie (June 6, 2017). "Twitter Users Blocked by Trump Seek Reprieve, Citing First Amendment". The New York Times. Archived from the original on June 6, 2017. Retrieved August 12, 2018. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
  13. ^ Plaintiff reply
  14. ^ Allsop, Jon (March 9, 2018). "In downtown New York, a First Amendment fight over Trump's tweets". Columbia Journalism Review. Archived from the original on March 9, 2018. Retrieved August 12, 2018. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
  15. ^ Wolfson, Sam (May 23, 2018). "Donald Trump cannot block anyone on Twitter, court rules". The Guardian. Retrieved May 24, 2018.
  16. ^ Buchwald decision
  17. ^ Ingram, Mathew (August 7, 2018). "Should journalists and researchers get a special exemption from Facebook's rules?". Columbia Journalism Review. Archived from the original on August 8, 2018. Retrieved August 11, 2018. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Knight_First_Amendment_Institute_v._Trump&oldid=854668503"