The US president has no right to block his opponents on Twitter just because they do not agree with him, said Tuesday a court of appeal composed of three judges. These magistrates confirm a decision taken in 2018 by a federal judge who felt that Donald Trump practiced "opinion discrimination" by preventing his critics from subscribing to his personal account @realDonaldTrump.
The magistrate then considered that the possibility of reacting to the frequent presidential tweets, commenting on them, was part of the exercise of freedom of expression protected by the First Amendment of the Constitution. The Ministry of Justice appealed. In its ruling released Tuesday, the court said Donald Trump did well on his Twitter account, followed by 61.8 million people, a public space related to his official duties.
This case was the result of a complaint by an organization defending freedom of expression
"The First Amendment does not allow a government official who uses an account on social media for all kinds of official reasons to exclude, in the course of an otherwise open online dialogue, people expressing responsible would not agree, "write the judges in a judgment of 29 pages.
The case was the result of a complaint filed by the Knight Institute, a Columbia University-based freedom of speech organization, on behalf of seven people "locked up" by Donald Trump. Among them were a New York comedian, a professor of sociology in Maryland, a Texan policeman and a singer from Seattle. Because of this block, they could not see the president's frequent tweets, and could not answer them directly.
"We are disappointed by the decision of the court and explore possible remedies"
The ministry argued that Donald Trump was not acting in his capacity as president when he blocked users, an interpretation rejected by the judges. "We consider that the evidence of the official nature of the account is overwhelming," they write in their decision. "We also consider that once the president has chosen a platform and opened this interactive space to millions of users and participants, he can not specifically exclude those with whom he does not agree". The administration of Donald Trump can still decide to seize the Supreme Court.
"We are disappointed by the decision of the court and are exploring possible remedies" in this case, said Kelly Laco, a spokeswoman for the Department of Justice. For the Knight Institute, "the accounts of public officials on social networks are now among the most important spaces for the discussion of government decisions." The ruling on appeal "will ensure that people are not excluded from these spaces simply because of their opinions, and that public officials are not cut off from criticism of their citizens," said Jameel Jaffer , director of the organization. He will also "help to ensure the integrity and vitality of digital spaces, which are increasingly important in our democracy," he added.