Blocked Twitter user cry 1st Amendment

File: IMG_4284.jpg (422KB, 1536x2048px) Image search: [Google]

422KB, 1536x2048px

>>128814173
Twitter users blocked by President Trump claim the president has no legal right to block them, citing the First Amendment

http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2017/06/06/trumps-verified-twitter-trolls-first-amendment-prohibits-president-from-blocking-us/

>>128814173
>@realdonaldtrump
>@potus
>cant figure out which is being used for official government use

>>128814329
You have the one where she's wearing the d.va outfit?

File: 5F195767-907E-49F9-9124-780ADB286FE3.jpg (125KB, 1080x1080px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 1080x1080px

>>128814521

>>128814173
That's not a violation of first amendment rights. The Don is not prohibiting people from speaking, he is choosing to block them on one specific form of social media.

>>128814173
this is it
i can feel it
the end
he is going to be impeached over this

>>128814916
>buy a full-body suit
>draw four stripes to your face
>this is somehow cosplay

Straight out of Alinsky's rules for radicals

Make your enemies play by different rules than you do.

You think a 1st amendment lawsuit would ever get anywhere if it were against Hillary? Not a fucking chance. Would've been laughed out of the courtroom immediately.

Different standards and different rules depending on who you are and what political or (((ethnic))) affiliation you hold.

Liberals get away with murder while conservatives get life in jail for jaywalking.

omg stop posting this RICED twitch slut.

>>128816075

its thiccplay

>>128814173
Does this mean i can sue all the keyboard warriors i want?

>>128814173
Who is this pure goddess?

File: b.jpg (257KB, 1118x746px) Image search: [Google]

257KB, 1118x746px

>>128814173
>>128816286
>>128817052
trap

>>128817209

leafs are the worst posters, without a doubt. NOT the best shitposters, just shitty posters.

Just find out how many Obongo or Hillshill blocked or even Bernie QED

>>128817209

she has bigger cheekbones than most men

>>128817866
Who is best shitposters then?

>>128815282
Still not allowed, if his twitter messages are in fact "official statements" Then by law he can't in any way shape or form prevent anyone from viewing or discussing what he's said

>>128819717
>Still not allowed,

Unless you're an expert in the subject matter you're in no position to make any sort of claim.

>>128814329
>>128814916
>>128814521
>>128814173
>>128816075
>>128816377
>>128817052
who is this

>>128820639
she's a webcam whore with an asian bf.
She is shilled here by shareblue to make you not be racist.

>>128814329
she is so vane she's probably staring at her own ass in the picture preview

File: ST Peach on Twitter.jpg (504KB, 1536x2048px) Image search: [Google]

504KB, 1536x2048px

>>128820639
ST Peach on Twitter

>>128820816
but give me a name

File: 1495125431988.png (299KB, 722x600px) Image search: [Google]

299KB, 722x600px

>>128814173
Such a typical non story we cant even draw any attention from bernouts and the trap pic is the topic of discussion

>>128814173
>>128814329
>Sit waiting for trump to tweet every second of the day
>Spew unending attacks on him, his cabinet, his family and young child.
>Cry when he gets sick of your shit and blocks you

>I HOPE YOU AND YOUR FAMILY GET RAPED AND KILL AND I HOPE YOUR CHILDREN GET RIPPED APART FROM THE INSIDE BY UNDOCUMENTED AMERICANS WHILE THEY CUM AND SHIT ON THEIR REMAINS
>WHAT HE BLOCKED ME!!?!?!? IMPEEEEEEACH!!!!!!!

>>128817209
wtf I'm gay now

>>128819717
To start: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

President Trump is using Twitter, a free public program, and has elected to block users he feels are offensive (for whatever reason). This is perfectly legitimate, and well within his rights as a public figure. She can still bitch and whine on her personal Twitter/Twitch/Facebook account, she just has been blocked from posting on Trump's Twitter. First amendment violations are the result of the government actually repressing speech. She can still complain about the President, just not on his personal Twitter account.

>>128820222
What a dumb little shits you Trumpsters are.

Here's the story y'all can read

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN18X2LR?feedType=RSS&feedName=politicsNews&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%253A+Reuters%252FPoliticsNews+%2528Reuters+Politics+News%2529

> Alex Abdo, the institute's senior staff attorney, likened Twitter to a modern form of town hall meeting or public comment periods for government agency proposals, both venues where U.S. law requires even-handed treatment of speech.

> Eric Goldman, a Santa Clara University law professor who focuses on internet law, said that previous cases involving politicians blocking users on Facebook (FB.O)

http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/virginia/vaedce/1:2016cv00932/348006/57/

Tl;dr this is the court precedents cited. I'd explain it, but y'all could do some reading for a change.

However I will say that this case was basically affirmed due to the courts views on strict scrutiny.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strict_scrutiny

When the government acts to restrict speech based on the speech's content, where the Court essentially weighs the Government's interest in restricting the speech against the individual's right to speak. This is a very high standard for the government to withstand: they have to show that they have a compelling government interest in restricting the speech and are using the least restrictive means to do so. Any restrictions that do not withstand this higher standard are unconstitutional. This could include Trump's blocks on comment he disagrees with.

The fact that Trump's tweets are "official" statements means that when Trump blocks users, the court will see him as a government agent, and not a private citizen and since twitter is considered a public forum, yes it could be a first amendment issue.

>>128821032
Hnnnnngggghhhh

I dont understand why liberals, who promote "safe spaces" and freedom to express yourself, hate it when people do the same.

Its his choice if he wants to listen.
It's his twitter feed.
They can still say whatever they want.

She can still read his tweets so there goes the "official statement" argument. See freedom of speech does not in any way give you a right to be heard. She can still post on her twatter so no rights are being denied. She could send an email or a good old fashioned letter to him if she likes so there is no silencing argument whatsoever. Suck it bitch

>>128814173
It's freedom of speech. Not freedom of hearing.

>>128822267
First off ((Goldman)). Secondly, fuck you, you fake news fake legal precedent writing fucking commie. Anyone who buys that shit you posted deserves to have their speech restricted.

>>128822267
As an actual attorney I invite you to read the federal district court case you site - which is not applicable.

Difference between a government created forum (county facebook page with specific posting rules) and a private forum used by public figure.

Look up "limited public forum" and try to read for comprehension this time.

>>128820639
Why does she always look CG?

I wonder if they acknowledge the readily apparent bias that Twitter displays in choosing who gets to be seen commenting on Trump's shit.