LOS ANGELES (AP) – A judge in San Francisco has rejected the case of former President Donald Trump to challenge his permanent ban on Twitter.
U.S. District Judge James Donato said on Friday that Trump had failed to show that Twitter had violated his right to freedom of speech under the First Amendment. Freedom of speech rights do not apply to private companies, and Trump has failed to show that Twitter is working as a state actor on behalf of Democrats, the judge said.
The amended complaint simply offers a package of allegations that some members of the Democratic Congress wanted Mr Trump and that “his views” were banned by Twitter, as such “content and views” contradicted the views preferred by these legislators, “Donato wrote. “But the comments of a handful of elected officials are far from a rule of decision for which the state is responsible.” Legislators are completely free to express opinions without being considered the official voice of the “state”.
Trump sued Google on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube in July 2021, claiming he was censored illegally.
The platforms stopped Trump after the January 6, 2021 uprising, in which his followers stormed the Capitol building in an attempt to block Congress from attesting to Joe Biden’s presidential victory. Companies voiced fears that he would incite further violence.
The decision comes as Elon Musk, the richest man in the world, is in the process of buying Twitter for $ 44 billion. The deal raised questions about whether Musk, who describes himself as an absolutist for freedom of speech, would reinstate the former president.
Trump, who continues to repeat lies about his defeat in the 2020 election in speeches, has created his own social network, Truth Social. Last week, he said he would not rejoin Twitter if given the opportunity.
The lawsuit seeks to restore Trump’s account, which had about 89 million followers, as well as those of five others who claim to have been censored by Twitter. The group has requested unspecified damages and class action status on behalf of others removed from the platform.
Legal experts predicted the case would fail, but speculated that Trump would milk it for political purposes. Trump’s political action committee immediately began raising money after the trial was announced last year.
The trial also requested a declaration that section 230 of the Communications Decency Act 1996 was unconstitutional.
The law says providers like Twitter can moderate services by removing obscene posts that violate their standards and cannot be held accountable for content posted by others.
Trump has only made a “vague and speculative statement” that he said he would not be banned if Twitter did not receive immunity from section 230, Donato said.
Donato gave Trump another opportunity to change his appeal. Trump’s lawyer did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Add Comment