A federal judge in California was fired Donald Trump’s lawsuit against Twitter Sixth, blur at least one avenue the former president and prolific tweeter may have used to get back to his platform of choice.
Trump’s argument that the social media company and its then-CEO Jack Dorsey violated his right to free speech failed to convince Judge James Donato of the Northern District of California to downplay it. .
“The plaintiff’s main claim is that the respondent has” censored[ed]”The plaintiff’s Twitter account violates their First Amendment right to freedom of expression,” Donato wrote. “The plaintiffs did not start from a strong position.”
In debunking the lawsuit, Donato pointed out the obvious: Twitter is a private company and isn’t bound by the First Amendment, which protects Americans from government Attempts to limit speech. Basically, Twitter can do whatever it wants when it comes to content moderation, just like any other online platform.
Donato shot down the link Trump’s legal team had tried to forge between the US government and Twitter, rejecting assertions that the company was somehow acting on behalf of the federal government because of its lawmakers. Democrats want Trump to launch the platform.
“The revised complaint merely makes a series of allegations that some Democrats in Congress want Mr Trump and ‘oppositions he espouses’ to be banned from Twitter,” Donato wrote. .
Despite the lawsuit, Trump has announced that he will not return to Twitter even if there is a chance. And with the company under the capricious leadership of misguided speech autocrat Elon Musk, he might actually be given that opportunity. At the same time, Trump continues to promote his own app, Truth Social, which currently sits at number 11 on the App Store’s social networking chart.
Trump and the other plaintiffs in the lawsuit – organizations and individuals that have similarly been kicked off Twitter – will make an effort to review their arguments, but Donato points out that the high level is because the Separating private industry and the public sector is “an issue of great importance.”
“The only hope for the plaintiffs in making their First Amendment claims is to rightfully allege that Twitter was acting as a government,” Donato wrote. “This is not an easy claim to make, for good reasons.”