I am unironically in favor of the entire Internet, including EVERY social media platform, being subject to the Bill of Rights. 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, etc. Every American freedom enforced by law. No more censoring, bans or suppresson. Make it happen!
Fight me.
Other urls found in this thread:
msn.com
mobile.nytimes.com
npr.org
mobile-reuters-com.cdn.ampproject.org
www-cbsnews-com.cdn.ampproject.org
en.m.wikipedia.org
courier-journal.com
blog.ericgoldman.org
supreme.justia.com
howtodotechystuff.wordpress.com
howtodotechystuff.wordpress.com
twitter.com
Does this mean twitter can't shadowban conservatives anymore?
No. The issue is that Trump is blocking people, and the judge says he can't prevent citizens from reading his tweets.
Everything the government publishes is public domain.
just log out of twitter and read the feed, woaaaahhhhhh
In this ruling, Twitter has become a public space, a regulated publisher, subject to constitutional law, and must comport themselves consistently according to this doctrine. There is no dual justice system. One rule of law for all.
OH NO NO NO NO NO
Yeah it's pretty retarded. Federal judges are deep state tools. Even the Bush appointees are out to get Trump.
Judge obviously doesn't understand how Twitter works.
Cool! That means the Daily Stormer can have their Twitter profile back again. Do these faggots ever think beyond 5 minutes?
This ruling has stricken Twitter from the ranks of Private Companies and declared all of Social Media subject to the US Constitution. This is a great day for freedom!
We could spam every single left-wing politician until they block us, then sue them
Yes. ALL speech must be treated equally under the law. Welcome back, Nazis!
this is just more proof of marxist judges being apointed so that god damn bolshevics pretending to be democrats can move an agenda that would NEVER get passed by the people through a court system of corrupt puppet judges whos next promotion depends on them selling the rest of us out. I got no idea who the judge was, how about someone look up who appointed him and get back to me.
lol
I am in favor of the entire Internet, including EVERY social media platform and especially Jow Forums, to criticize, mock, tease, ridicule, insult, encourage suicide, and overwhelmingly pound the fact that the person is a faggot for using the word “unironically.”
Faggot.
Interestingly when Obama was POTUS they didn't have any problem with him blocking people. Leftists, as usual, want one set of rules for themselves and another set for the rest of us.
She's a Clinton appointee.
It's time to spam Schumer, Pelosi and this faggot judge's twitters with hate speech until they block you.
>I am unironically in favor of the entire Internet, including EVERY social media platform, being subject to the Bill of Rights. 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, etc. Every American freedom enforced by law. No more censoring, bans or suppresson. Make it happen!
>*As long as it's never actually linked to my actual identity because I don't want to face any consequences for my speech
This also means that Twitter is a public forum. If Twitter bans people they are now incapable of communicating with a public official. That makes Twitter a public forum.
I unironically support your right to fuck ladybois in the puccy in Tailand, faggot. Enjoy your free speech!
appointed by bill clinton.
would have never guessed...
Could it be Bill "it was her turn" Clinton who appointed her????
Twitter is a private organization. They can allow or disallow anyone they want from using or banning or doing anything else with their software.
If you don't like it, use something else.
4th Amendment Right to Privacy.
DEAL WITH IT, FAGGOT.
>he thinks this wont be applied subjectively
They're just unbanning all of their bots and disallowing Trump from blocking them. This is intended to aid leftists in spreading propaganda online.
Unless Twitter puts up a huge banner saying all users are unbanned and there's no such thing as hate speech anymore I have no reason to believe otherwise.
This Goy... he gets it.
Don't worry Twitter will ban you before that happenes
You can't have private streets that are the only place you can listen to an elected official speak in an official capacity. There's laws already written against that.
why should speech have consequences? why does the left keep implying that speech should have consequences? I wish you fascists would stop with your ridiculous tyranny.
Nope. It is now a Public Utility. Suspending me infringes on my 1st Am right to communicate with a Public Official. Suck it!
>cant ban or block
he should make a reddit account
Yup every single public official now has to reveal their hidden accounts, trump btfo right?
Do they not prevent nuisances from going to public forums and.. creating a scene? I'm pretty sure they do that. What's the difference?
>4th Amendment Right to Privacy.
That's not what the 4th Amendment means.
Yup. It's illegal now. Hallelujah!
Troll away, lads... Troll away!
That was the intent. But I believe this chucklefuck of a judge doesn't realize she just doomed the propaganda control system. She's completely ignorant of laws dictating free speech on the internet and free speech laws on private property.
Reposting:
There's a conflicting ruling by another judge in a similar case.
>Instead, this Court is convinced that Governor Bevin's use of privately owned Facebook Page and Twitter pages is personal speech, and, because he is speaking on his own behalf, even on his own behalf as a public official, "the First Amendment strictures that attend the various types of government-established forums do not apply.
With split rulings from different judges, it increases the chance of supreme court ruling on this.
My post does not prevent you from posting your own message in the same way as yelling over me in public does. There is no Heckler's Veto exception in this case.
Of course it does. You have no right to force me to reveal personal info. That's doxxing.
May Kek let it be so!!
If the supreme court takes a whack at this one, no matter what happens Twitter is coming out a public forum.
There's a similar ruling already about privately owned streets. That just because a company owns them, since they're open to the public, that must adhere to free speech protections as a public forum.
I didn't say a word about preventing someone from saying anything. They can tweet whatever the fuck they want.. just as someone at a public forum can stand outside and say whatever the fuck they want. What you can't do, though, is create a scene and expect to not be ejected. This is true for both. Try your mental gymnastics with a peer - you know, a retarded nigger.
No. The Fourth Amendment protects your private information from criminal prosecution. It does not stop all the people in town or your neighbor from telling everyone you're a fucking jackass because you said something racist at the block party, even if they just made it up. I mean, you might be able to take them to civil court depending on if it were slander or libel but it's not a 4th amendment thing.
I'm actually curious how this is going to affect the whole idea of corporations having citizen's rights and websites/forums being private property.
Leftists have been abusing this to censor the right for so long that anything threatening it would cause a shitstorm.
Just look at the net neutrality drama.
>It does not stop all the people in town or your neighbor from telling everyone you're a fucking jackass because you said something racist at the block party, even if they just made it up.
That's where the second amendment applies.
>That's where the second amendment applies.
Wait...what? No.
Yes it does. Particularly against the family of the person who stirred up the crowd.
Thank you! I didn't realize that I was a Nazi! That's fucking nuts considering I'm not a German National Socialist nor am I an American National Socialist! I had no idea that because I advocate free speech that means I'm a Nazi! Thanks for the update, you fucking nigger. Lol!
im an amendment to beeee
yes an amendment to beeee
and i am hoping that they'll ratify meeeee
>Trump's tweets
>government publications
There is no "creating a scene" exception to the 1st Am you utter fuckwit.
They can say whatever they want about my public comments. They have no right to know my identity or any other information I choose not to disclose.
But you have to understand that there are faggots who think that because Trump has tweeted out policies of his own that somehow means that Twitter is somehow his political platform and that means he is subjected to full disclosure no matter what he tweets.
anyone can view his tweets without logging in. dummies.
Found the faggot
hey faggots. shit is going to be overturned.
look up Minnesota Community College v. Knight
There is already supreme court precedence for this.
supreme.justia.com
Appellees have no constitutional right, either as members of the public, as state employees, or as college instructors, to force officers of the State acting in an official policymaking capacity to listen to appellees'
Found the shill.
Nice contribution. TIL.
lol they aren't going to enforce it and the Judge already said that.
I would give my life for this
>Judge Rules
So? This is going to get overturned on appeal, even the media is saying as much today.
This is just some lowly district judge. It's like that Hawaiian judge with the travel ban thing all again. Today's ruling means diddly.
You looking ina mirror faggot?
An unenforceable ruling based on a lady judges feelings, when will they ever learn?
she won't enforce it because she can't enforce it, and she knows she can't.
That's not the way it works, man. You don't just get to walk around in public with a mask on and say and do whatever the fuck you want. I mean, you can keep living in this delusional reality with antifa leftists, if you like, but it's not going to work out for you.
This makes no sense. It's the fucking internet, if anything he should unblock anyone from the US, not the entire world, and it's hard to tell since it's the fucking internet.
>Trump is retarded
>all the things Trump does are because he's too stupid
Trump has been planning this. Everyone in the government, even those who are portrayed in media as fighting him, are not his enemy. Every move Trump takes has been calculated for many, many years. He's an incredibly intelligent man with a strong agenda -- if he wasn't, if he was just a con man, he would have taken his election win and proceeded to do absolutely nothing. Instead he's set about fighting the system.
This court ruling will set the precedent of this form of freedom of speech applying to the internet, even to networks operated by private companies like Facebook. If a citizen cannot be blocked from a Twitter account solely for disagreeing, then no more can a Facebook group admin remove anyone because of anything offensive.
This ruling will only conceivably be taken to apply to default-public things, like the President's Twitter, so that private accounts such as your Facebook page can remain private and nobody has the right to look through your emails [insert Clinton server joke].
This will do a lot to show how much double standards are being pushed, IF it can be successfully pushed that Obama practiced blocking people all the time. It might also go a long way, legally, towards fighting the Twitter (and associated platforms) policy of banning anyone with offensive or 'offensive' views.
Trump picks his fights. There really seemed to be no downside, politically speaking, for the administration from the moment this even became an issue.
If twitter is subject to American freedom of speech it also means that it's subject to the summary decision that there are no clauses that prevent hate speech within it.
I.E. if Trump can't block you we should be able to say whatever we please on their platform.
>I am unironically in favor of the entire Internet, including EVERY social media platform, being subject to the Bill of Rights. 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, etc. Every American freedom enforced by law. No more censoring, bans or suppresson. Make it happen!
Though i'm not american, i agree with this. You don't want what we have here in France.
I live in a country where you can get sued and even sent to jail for voicing certain political opinions or even for using racial slurs.
Jow Forums is the only place where i can read uncensored opinions on any subject (sadly).
That'll never happen, it's only selective enforcement as long as commies are still living.
You faggots realize you can read it without being logged in.
All of your arguments are no longer legitimate.
It would be different if the judge said people should be able to _interact_
the ruling is specifically about the twitter accounts of political persons like trump, you fucking mutt. he's the president and his account has been considered an official channel of communication, so it's subject to the same rules as any other official government communication method. that means you can't prevent people from calling him a faggot on it just like you can't prevent people from calling hillary a faggot.
>That's not the way it works, man.
No, quite the opposite, that's EXACTLY how it works. And it's exactly how it's supposed to. You don't get to be the arbiter of "justice" and impose your ill will on people who you arbitrarily disagree with. That's precisely what the first amendment was for, and applied doubly so for anything government-related.
>and his account has been considered an official channel of communication
By who's authority? I know for a fact Trump never made no official stance of twitter being the means of his communication.