Author Topic: Justice Clarence Thomas Takes Aim At Tech And Its Power 'To Cut Off Speech'  (Read 710 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Right_in_Virginia

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 79,717
Justice Clarence Thomas Takes Aim At Tech And Its Power 'To Cut Off Speech'
Iowa Public Radio, Apr 5, 2021

The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a lower court ruling that former President Donald Trump violated the First Amendment rights of critics he blocked on Twitter.

Lawyers for those Trump blocked on Twitter argued that the former president's Twitter account functioned as an official source of information about the government, leading a federal appeals court to rule that Trump's blocking amounted to illegally silencing their viewpoints.

But Trump is no longer in office, and Twitter has permanently banned him from its platform over glorifying violence. So the lower court's ruling from the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals should be tossed, the Supreme Court ruled, instructing the court to dismiss the case as "moot," or no longer active.

While the case can no longer be cited as precedent, other courts have held that an elected official's social media accounts can be treated as public forums. And so the dismissal "is unlikely to affect the development of the law," said Jameel Jaffer, director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, which sued Trump over his blocking of critics.

"I think public officials are and should be on notice that if they block people from their social media accounts on the basis of viewpoint, they are violating the First Amendment," Jaffer told told.

The decision from the high court did not surprise court watchers, but a concurrence in the ruling from Justice Clarence Thomas has drawn intense attention in technology circles.

In it, Thomas took broad aim at social media networks, attacking Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, the landmark law that protects technology companies from lawsuits and also provides platforms wide latitude in patrolling speech on their sites.

To Thomas, Twitter's ban of Trump exposed the potential abuses of this legal protection, noting how "applying old doctrines to new digital platforms is rarely straightforward."

Thomas went on: "As Twitter made clear, the right to cut off speech lies most powerfully in the hands of private digital platforms. The extent to which that power matters for purposes of the First Amendment and the extent to which that power could lawfully be modified raise interesting and important questions," Thomas wrote.


More: https://www.iowapublicradio.org/news-from-npr/2021-04-05/justice-clarence-thomas-takes-aims-at-tech-and-its-power-to-cut-off-speech

Offline Right_in_Virginia

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 79,717
Stephen Miller
@StephenM


The dominant social media companies can and should be regulated like public utilities.  Just like a telephone company cannot lawfully discriminate, neither should large digital communication platforms.

Quote

Justice Thomas argues for making Facebook, Twitter and Google utilities
Last fall, Justice Clarence Thomas argued that it was time to rein in Section 230 immunity. Now, Justice Thomas is laying out an argument for why companies like Facebook, Twitter and Google should be...
https://www.protocol.com/bulletins/thomas-scotus-twitter-trump-ban

12:26 PM · Apr 5, 2021·Twitter for iPad

https://twitter.com/StephenM/status/1379108068273836039

Offline Sled Dog

  • The Ultimate Weapon: Freedom - I Won't
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,138
The accounts of public officials should not be treated as public forums.

They should be treated as public RECORDS from which NO deletions can be made, for any reason by any person.  This would include the comments made by the public, which should not be restricted because of the First Amendment.

Of course, what will happen now is that the Rodents will demand Thomas "recuse himself" for speaking out of school on the criminal monopolies that help the Rodents steal elections.   

Just like they demanded Kagan recuse itself on the question of MessiahCare.  Oh, wait, the Rodents did not do that, but they certainly will make the demand about Uncle Thomas.

« Last Edit: April 06, 2021, 12:23:18 am by Sled Dog »
The GOP is not the party leadership.  The GOP is the party MEMBERSHIP.   The members need to kick the leaders out if they leaders are going the wrong way.  No coddling allowed.

Offline Sled Dog

  • The Ultimate Weapon: Freedom - I Won't
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,138
Stephen Miller
@StephenM


The dominant social media companies can and should be regulated like public utilities.  Just like a telephone company cannot lawfully discriminate, neither should large digital communication platforms.

12:26 PM · Apr 5, 2021·Twitter for iPad

https://twitter.com/StephenM/status/1379108068273836039

 :yowsa:

They want to be monopolies.

They abuse power like monopolies.

Let them be regulated like the communications monopolies they are.

Which, btw, would include a total clamp-down on their use of identifiable personal information.   
The GOP is not the party leadership.  The GOP is the party MEMBERSHIP.   The members need to kick the leaders out if they leaders are going the wrong way.  No coddling allowed.

Offline Polly Ticks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,943
  • Gender: Female
Interesting.  I wonder how this question will make it's way up to the USSC and how soon.
Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good, too. -Yogi Berra

Offline Right_in_Virginia

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 79,717
Clarence Thomas Provides Legal Roadmap To Tearing Down Social Media Censorship
The Federalist, Apr 5, 2021, Tristan Justice

https://thefederalist.com/2021/04/05/clarence-thomas-provides-legal-roadmap-to-tearing-down-social-media-censorship/#.YGtdzxdJiDk.twitter