A Duke School of Medicine alumnus beat President Donald Trump in court Wednesday.
A federal judge in NY ruled Wednesday that President Donald Trump can't block people from his Twitter account because they disagree with his political views, saying such action violates the First Amendment.
The effect of the ruling reaches beyond Trump and will bar other government officials from also blocking users based on their political views. With over 50 million followers, Trump is the world's most followed world leader.
Buchwald agreed, but said that blocking a user with opposing political views still prevented the user from fully interacting with the president's account-whether it be by retweeting, replying, and so on. As a result, blocking these users from replying to and retweeting Trump tweets violated the First Amendment. The New York judge, appointed in 1999, offered a solution that Trump simply "mute" certain accounts.
The judge said Trump couldn't suppress such responses. Instead, merely declaring that the president has violated the rules of the Constitution should be more than enough to compel his team to take the appropriate action.
Since being block, they were unable to see the president's tweets that have included policy proposals and cabinet appointments.
Could this impact Twitter users in Australia?
A uniquely 21st-century constitutional question received a satisfying answer today from a federal judge: President Trump can not block people on Twitter, as it constitutes a violation of their First Amendment rights.
"We respectfully disagree with the court's decision and are considering our next steps", Kerri Kupec, Justice Department spokesperson said.
In addition to the president, defendants named in the lawsuit include former White House communications director Hope Hicks, press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders and social media director Dan Scavino ― the man thought to be behind much of Trump's unusual social media behavior.
If Donald Trump blocks someone, that person loses the opportunity to reply to Trump tweets and have their tweet show up underneath them.
"The essence of this ruling is that viewpoint discrimination is prohibited", Calvert said.
The Department of Justice argued previous year that users who are not logged into their Twitter accounts can still see the president's tweets online because they are public.
I'm not sure Trump will see it that way. "The court says this is a designated public forum and the general presumption is everyone can enter". A city government can't say that only Republicans, Christians, or vegetarians are allowed to hold rallies in the town square, and it can't blacklist activists with a history of criticizing the mayor.
Trump isn't the first politician to face resistance for blocking critics from social media. The group argued the practice violates the First Amendment.
The lawsuit against Mr Trump and other White House officials stems from his decision to bar several online critics. A federal judge denied a request for a preliminary court order that would've stopped the governor from blocking anyone.
"The judge wrote a very careful opinion", Caplan said.
The case is Knight First Amendment Institute v. Trump, 17-cv-5205, U.S. District Court, Southern District of NY.