The 1stA doesnt cover twitter...

Does the POTUS blocking someone prevent the tweet from going out?

No.

Their speech is not impacted.

He's just not listening to what they say.

Effectively what this says is that a government official must listen to everything anyone has to say, at any time.

 

I don't see this as a first amendment thing, its an access to the president thing.

 

Because others aren't government. The bill of rights reduces the powers of government. It doesn't apply to the private sector. Government can't impede personal expression. But everyone else can. If Trump wants to block someone who responds to a tweet about his golf game, that is fine. When he does it to someone who responds to things related to government, he can't. He can't do it with any form of communication.

 

That's absolute nonsense, if that were the case you could argue people have the right to the presidential phone lines and have a right to call the president whenever they want. This is a horrible ruling by a horrible liberal judge...

 

Tell that to Obama's anti-protesting bill he passed that keeps people from protesting in buildings with secret service agents located.

 

It has nothing to do with listening. It relates to personal expression. He doesn't have to listen to or read anything. He just can't stop someone from saying it or writing it. You and I can but he can't. If you value the first amendment you should be glad of this.

 

He didn't stop them from saying it or writing it.

Did the tweet go out?

blocking someone is like walking away while someone is talking.

It doesn't stop you from talking, it just means you don't listen to it.

 

And blocking people doesn't stop them from doing any of that, it stops him from having to read or listen. thanks for proving our point.

 

Anyone can call the president at any time. The chances of getting through, however, are minimal. He doesn't have to listen to you or respond to you or care what you say. He just can't stop you from saying it. If he won't answer the phone, you will have to exercise your speech in some other way. This isn't that complicated.

 

who says it doesnt.

 

And how is this different than tweeting?

Just because he doesn't listen to you there doesn't mean he infringed on your right to say what you wanted.

 

excuse me as a single tear rolls down my cheek in empathy of your pain.

i already told you, records act 1950, it is public domain. using twitter or anything else is irrelevant.

 

Trump routinely deletes tweets.

 

He blocks people because he doesn't want to read it. I understand that. I don't use Twitter so I'm no expert. My assumption is that blocking prevents someone from responding to his account. If so, then Trump can't do that because he is government. If it allows the post but simply causes Trump not to see it, then it would have nothing to do with the first amendment. Which is it?

 

If they are selectively blocking users because they do not like the content of the messages being presented by those individuals? Yes.

 

Wrong, private citizens do not have access to the president's phone number. Oddly enough, I can't call this judge directly, I'd have to go through a screening process first, imagine that. This has nothing to do with speech and everything to do with access and we have layers and layers of protection that reduce access to just about every single government employee...

I suppose it would be funny if conservative tweeters just bombarded this judge's account and sued her if she tried to block them...

 

that twitter is not subject to trumps whims, but to federal policies, procedures and law.

 

You will not.

 

If it was subject to federal policies, procedures and laws, then blocking would not be a feature they could use, nor could they ban anyone from the platform regardless of what they say.

The individual was not prevented from tweeting.

Thus, his 1A rights were not infringed.

 

I'm going to the press conference and am going to ask Sarah Sanders questions and they cannot stop me! 1st Amendment rights!

 

well that is what the judge ruled.

 

Clearly the judge either doesn't understand the 1A, or is a liberal activist that has no regard for the law.

 

Sit in the back of the room and tweet them at her.

 

If one person can access Trump's Twitter and another cannot, the fact that someone can means the record has been preserved. You do understand you simply cannot just go to some government office and get records, you have to actually request them, often after filling out lengthy forms. I cannot see how this is different, reducing immediate access but not hindering access completely is well within the scope and scale of the Records Act...

 

It isn't. You can say whatever you like. You cannot force people to listen to you or to respond. I may misunderstand Twitter since I don't use it. You are saying that if someone responds to his account, blocking doesn't prevent the communication from appearing to everyone reading the account, it simply blocks Trump from seeing it? If so then what I wrote above is incorrect. For government to ignore the content of free speech is not contrary to the first amendment. Preventing it is contrary to it.