Where is that constitutional provision?
@jsf:It'll be interesting to see the ruling, although I'm
betting they'll kick it down the road with a compromise if they can. I wish one of our actual lawyers would chime in here. And I
admit I see Trump as the loudmouth at the end of the bar, screaming insults
around the room and becoming incensed when people actually stand up and respond.
"An official account of an elected official cannot block speech without
running afoul of the First." Please show me in the constitution where it
says this.No a politician that receives constituents in his home can
still bar entrance from detractors. Just like a congressman can bar groups from
entering his office. It is not a free speech issue.IMHO it appears
that a state of feeling very unhappy, uneasy, about Constitutional rights is
causing a cognitive dissonance were constitutional rights come in.
@Spoc: "Not being either a legal scholar or a Twitter user, I need
clarification."On Twitter I follow a number of politicians
holding political office. They have an account used for "official
business," that is announcements on positions and policies and projects,
sometimes comments on current legislation or current events. It is much like a
press office, and may be handled by the politician or by someone in the office
or a combination. I am also friends with a couple of politicians and
follow their personal feeds - kid's birthdays and where they had dinner and
such like. Personal stuff, not official. Trump's usage and
statements are that, as President (elected official) his personal twitter feed
is his official platform. Sort of like your local councilman
declaring his living room is his official place to talk to his constituents,
then baring certain constituents from entering... I am not a legal
scholar, either, that is what I understand of the case. It comes down to how it
is being used and if it is, by usage, his official platform, then he can't
Ginger,Not being either a legal scholar or a Twitter user, I need
clarification.Is there a form I would need to fill out to turn a private
account into an official account belonging to the Federal Government? Or, by
virtue of election, all personal accounts are now deemed public? Hillary
probably would argue against that concept with regard to email accounts, but
that is not the topic here.Perhaps it is by virtue of content. I
doubt he has tweeted out or received any classified information. But if he posts
the Seal of the President on his account or just tells people he is the POTUS,
then it becomes public domain?So, I am curious. You said "Trump
acted to turn his private citizen account into an elected official account".
How did he go about doing that?
More evidence IMO that this president seeks to turn the country into a
@jsf: "This is a real scary attack on the first amendment."Trump was a private citizen who had a personal Twitter account he primarily
used to insult and feud with people. His prerogative. Trump was
elected. He did not let his Twitter go fallow and start communicating his
official messages through an official presidential account. He, by word and
deed, turned his private account into the official account an elected official
uses to communicate with his constituents. A private account can
censor and block at will - I know I do. An official account of an
elected official cannot block speech without running afoul of the First. Trump acted to turn his private citizen account into an elected official
account, but now wants private citizen rules to apply. Can't
have it both ways.
This is a real scary attack on the first amendment. This is not you have free
speech, this is you can be forced to listen to my free speech. This
is saying you must listen to Fox News you don't get to decide. You must
listen to MSM you don't get a choice.You must take that 3 am
phone call from that crazy ranting neighbor that hates you.No I
don't have to listen to you, just because free speech allows you to say it.
Maybe he could stop running the country through tweets. That would help.