Knight First Amendment Institute v. Trump

Knight First Amendment Institute v. Trump
Court	United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
Full case name	Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University; Rebecca Buckwalter; Philip Cohen; Holly Figueroa; Eugene Gu; Brandon Neely; Joseph Papp; and Nicholas Pappas, Plaintiffs, v. Donald J. Trump, President of the United States; Sean M. Spicer, White House Press Secretary; and Daniel Scavino, White House Director of Social Media and Assistant to the President, Defendants.
Decided	May 23, 2018
Docket nos.	1:17-cv-05205
Defendant	Donald Trump Sean Spicer Daniel Scavino
Plaintiff(s)	Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University Rebecca Buckwalter Philip Cohen Holly Figueroa Eugene Gu Brandon Neely Joseph Papp Nicholas Pappas

Knight First Amendment Institute v. Trump, No. 1:17-cv-05205 (S.D.N.Y.) is a lawsuit filed on July 11, 2017 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York and decided May 23, 2018. The plaintiffs, Philip N. Cohen, Eugene Gu, Holly Figueroa O'Reilly, Nicholas Pappas, Joseph M. Papp, Rebecca Buckwalter-Poza, and Brandon Neely, are a group of Twitter users blocked by U.S. President Donald Trump's personal @realDonaldTrump account.^[1] They allege that this account constitutes a public forum, and that blocking access to it is a violation of their First Amendment rights. The lawsuit also names as defendants White House press secretary Sean Spicer and social media director Dan Scavino.^{[2][3][4][5][6]}

The plaintiffs are represented by the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, which itself is a plaintiff in the case.^[2][3][4] Though the Knight Institute's Twitter account has not been blocked by Trump,^[7] the lawsuit argues that they and other followers of the @realDonaldTrump Twitter account "are now deprived of their right to read the speech of the dissenters who have been blocked".^[8] The complaint also argues that posts to the @realDonaldTrump account are "official statements".^[9]

Background[]

On Twitter, blocked users cannot see or respond to tweets from the account that blocked them. As of July 2017, the @realDonaldTrump Twitter account had 33.7 million followers.^[10][11] Trump's tweets were often retweeted tens of thousands of times, and Trump frequently used Twitter to make policy statements, prior to being permanently suspended from Twitter,^[12] and losing the 2020 election and leaving the White House.^[13] In June 2017, Spicer stated that Trump's tweets are considered "official statements by the president of the United States". In July 2017, Trump tweeted that his use of social media is "MODERN DAY PRESIDENTIAL".^[10][11] Another lawsuit, CREW and National Security Archive v. Trump and EOP was filed in the District of Columbia, alleging violations of the Presidential Records Act for deleting tweets.

A month prior to filing this lawsuit, the Knight Institute had sent a letter to Trump on behalf of two of the blocked Twitter users, asking that they and other blocked users have their accounts unblocked by Trump. The letter argued that Trump's personal Twitter account is a public forum, and that it is therefore unconstitutional to exclude dissenting views. The letter was copied to Spicer, Scavino, and White House counsel Don McGahn.^[3][14] The Trump administration has not responded to the letter.^[8] Knight First Amendment Institute won the 2020 Webby People's Voice Award for Law in the category Web.^[15]

Analysis and criticism[]

In response to critics who question whether Twitter should be considered a public forum, Knight Institute senior attorney Katie Fallow cited a June 19, 2017 U.S. Supreme Court decision, Packingham v. North Carolina, in which Justice Anthony Kennedy described social media as "the modern public square" and as one of the most important places for the exchange of views. The ruling, which was unanimous, struck down a North Carolina law that prohibited registered sex offenders from accessing social media sites.^[2]

Later developments[]

The Complaint was filed July 11, 2017.^[5] The Plaintiffs' reply was filed on December 1, 2017.^[16] Oral arguments were heard before Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald on March 9, 2018.^[17]

On May 23, 2018, Buchwald granted in part and denied in part the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, ruling that Trump blocking people on Twitter is unconstitutional on First Amendment grounds. The court ruled that the @realDonaldTrump Twitter account is "a presidential account as opposed to a personal account", and blocking people from it violates their rights to participate in a "designated public forum".^[18] Buchwald introduced the decision by writing:

This case requires us to consider whether a public official may, consistent with the First Amendment, “block” a person from his Twitter account in response to the political views that person has expressed, and whether the analysis differs because that public official is the President of the United States. The answer to both questions is no.^[19]

After this ruling, the 7 Twitter users that were a part of the lawsuit were unblocked.^[20]

In August 2018, the government filed an appeal brief with the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.^[21] Also in August, the Knight First Amendment Institute sent a letter to the U.S. Justice Department requesting that the President comply with the Judge's ruling and unblock a list of 41 additional Twitter users, including Danny Zuker, MoveOn activist Jordan Uhl, health care activist Laura Packard, and journalists like Alex Kotch and Jules Suzdaltsev.^[22] Those users were then unblocked by @realDonaldTrump.^[23]

In October 2018, the plaintiffs filed their brief in response to the government's appeal.^[24] Oral argument was heard March 26, 2019.^[25] The Second Circuit issued its decision on July 9, 2019, upholding Judge Buchwald's opinion.^[26] The Second Circuit determined that Trump used his Twitter to conduct official government business, and therefore, he cannot block Americans from the account on the basis of their political views.^[27][28] The government was denied an en banc review by the full Second Circuit in March 2020.^[29]

On the day of the Second Circuit's decision, former New York state representative Dov Hikind and candidate Joey Salads separately sued U.S. Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez within New York state federal district courts for blocking them from her Twitter account, based on the ruling from the Second Circuit.^[30][31]

In July 2020, the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University sued Donald Trump again, on behalf of users who were blocked before Trump's inauguration, or who were not able to identify which tweet prompted Trump to block them.^[32]

Trump petitioned the Supreme Court in August 2020 to hear his appeal of the Second Circuit's decision to uphold Judge Buchwald's opinion. Trump's petition requested the Supreme Court to answer the question "Whether the First Amendment deprives a government official of his right to control his personal Twitter account by blocking third-party accounts if he uses that personal account in part to announce official actions and policies."^[33] Following the election, in which Joe Biden was elected president, Biden became the petitioning party on this and other pending Supreme Court cases replacing Trump in his role as president.^[34] On January 19, 2021, the Justice Department filed a brief asking the Supreme Court to vacate the Second Circuit ruling on the grounds that Trump is no longer president and thus the case no longer concerns Trump's account in its official capacity, rendering the case moot.^[35] The Knight Institute has responded to this brief by arguing the Second Circuit ruling should remain, claiming "The case is moot because President Trump's repeated violation of Twitter's terms of service led that company to shut down his account and to ban him permanently from its platform. Because it was President Trump's own voluntary actions that made the case moot, the Supreme Court should leave the appeals court's ruling in place."^[36] The Supreme Court subsequently vacated the decision and remanded the case to the Second Circuit as to render the case moot on April 5, 2021.^[37]

See also[]

• Donald Trump on social media
• List of lawsuits involving Donald Trump

References[]

External links[]

• Text of the lawsuit
• Buchwald Decision
• Knight First Amendment Institute