{"id":25191,"date":"2021-07-09T06:42:02","date_gmt":"2021-07-09T06:42:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/rbsitsoftwaresolution.com\/blog\/trumps-new-lawsuits-against-social-media-companies-are-going-nowhere-fast.html"},"modified":"2021-07-09T06:42:02","modified_gmt":"2021-07-09T06:42:02","slug":"trumps-new-lawsuits-against-social-media-companies-are-going-nowhere-fast","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.rbsitsoftwaresolution.in\/blog\/trumps-new-lawsuits-against-social-media-companies-are-going-nowhere-fast.html","title":{"rendered":"Trump\u2019s new lawsuits against social media companies are going nowhere fast"},"content":{"rendered":"

Trump\u2019s spicy trio of lawsuits<\/a> against the social media platforms that he believes wrongfully banned him have succeeded in showering the former president with a flurry of media attention, but that\u2019s likely where the story ends.<\/p>\n

Like Trump\u2019s quixotic and ultimately empty quest to gut Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act during his presidency<\/a>, the new lawsuits are all sound and fury with little legal substance to back them up.<\/p>\n

\n

Going to war with Twitter, Trump threatens critical social media legal protections<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\n

The suits allege that Twitter, Facebook and YouTube violated Trump\u2019s First Amendment rights by booting him from their platforms, but the First Amendment is intended to protect citizens from censorship by the government \u2014 not private industry. The irony that Trump himself was the uppermost figure in the federal government at the time probably won\u2019t be lost on whoever\u2019s lap this case lands in.<\/p>\n

In the lawsuits, which also name Twitter and Facebook chief executives Jack Dorsey and Mark Zuckerberg as well as Google CEO Sundar Pichai (Susan Wojcicki escapes notice once again!), Trump accuses the three companies of engaging in \u201cimpermissible censorship resulting from threatened legislative action, a misguided reliance upon Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, and willful participation in joint activity with federal actors.\u201d<\/p>\n

The suit claims that the tech companies colluded with \u201cDemocrat lawmakers,\u201d the CDC and Dr. Anthony Fauci, who served in Trump\u2019s own government at the time.<\/p>\n

The crux of the argument is that communication between the tech companies, members of Congress and the federal government somehow transforms Facebook, Twitter and YouTube into \u201cstate actors\u201d \u2014 a leap of epic proportions:<\/p>\n

\n

Defendant Twitter\u2019s status thus rises beyond that of a private company to that of a state actor, and as such, Defendant is constrained by the First Amendment right to free speech in the censorship decisions it makes.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Trump\u2019s own Supreme Court appointee Brett Kavanaugh issued the court\u2019s opinion on a relevant case two years ago<\/a>. It examined whether a nonprofit running public access television channels in New York qualified as a \u201cstate actor\u201d that would be subject to First Amendment constraints. The court ruled that running the public access channels didn\u2019t transform the nonprofit into a government entity and that it retained a private entity\u2019s rights to make editorial decisions.<\/p>\n

\u201d \u2026 A private entity \u2026 who opens its property for speech by others is not transformed by that fact alone into a state actor,\u201d Justice Kavanaugh wrote in the decision.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s not likely that a court would decide that talking to the government or being threatened by the government somehow transform Twitter, YouTube and Facebook into state actors either.<\/p>\n

\n

Threat of inauguration violence casts a long shadow over social media<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\n

Trump vs. Section 230 (again)<\/h3>\n

First Amendment aside \u2014 and there\u2019s really not much of an argument there \u2014 social media platforms are protected by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, a concise snippet of law that shields them from liability not just for the user-generated content they host but for the moderation decisions they make about what content to remove.<\/p>\n

In line with Trump\u2019s obsessive disdain for tech\u2019s legal shield, the lawsuits repeatedly rail against Section 230. The suits try to argue that because Congress threatened to revoke tech\u2019s 230 protections, that forced them to ban Trump, which somehow makes social media companies part of the government and subject to First Amendment constraints.<\/p>\n

Of course, Republican lawmakers<\/a> and Trump\u2019s own administration<\/a> made frequent threats about repealing Section 230, not that it changes anything because this line of argument doesn\u2019t make much sense anyway.<\/p>\n

The suit also argues that Congress crafted Section 230 to intentionally censor speech that is otherwise protected by the First Amendment, ignoring that the law was born in 1996, well before ubiquitous social media, and for other purposes altogether<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\n

Trump\u2019s odd new attack on Section 230 is probably doomed<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\n

For the four years of his presidency, Trump\u2019s social media activity \u2014 his tweets in particular \u2014 informed the events of the day, both nationally and globally. While other world leaders and political figures used social media to communicate or promote their actions, Trump\u2019s Twitter account was usually the action itself.<\/p>\n

In the shadow of his social media bans, the former president has failed to reestablish lines of communication to the internet at large. In May, he launched a new blog, \u201cFrom the Desk of Donald J. Trump,\u201d but the site was taken down just a month later after it failed to attract much interest<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The handful of pro-Trump alternative social platforms are still struggling with app store content moderation requirements at odds with their extreme views<\/a> on free speech, but that didn\u2019t stop Gettr, the latest, from going ahead with its own rocky launch last week<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Viewed in one light, Trump\u2019s lawsuits are a platform too, his latest method for broadcasting himself to the online world that his transgressions eventually cut him off from. In that sense, they seem to have succeeded, but in all other senses, they won\u2019t.<\/p>\n

\n

Going to war with Twitter, Trump threatens critical social media legal protections<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\n

\n

Trump is suing Twitter, Facebook and YouTube over censorship claims<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\n

Article source: http:\/\/feedproxy.google.com\/~r\/techcrunch\/social\/~3\/CFnunVaVnpQ\/<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Trump\u2019s spicy trio of lawsuits against the social media platforms that he believes wrongfully banned him have succeeded in showering the former president with a flurry of media attention, but <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[3],"tags":[10,7,14,15,6,12,11],"class_list":["post-25191","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-latest-update","tag-computer-news","tag-downloads","tag-microsoft-download-news","tag-networking-updates","tag-technology-update","tag-wordpress-plugin-download","tag-wordpress-theme-download"],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t