Legal Experts Tear Apart Trump’s Lawsuit: ‘Every Bit as Stupid as You’d Think It Is’
On Wednesday, ex-president Donald Trump held a press conference to describe his new class-action lawsuit against Google, Facebook, and Twitter over “illegal, shameful censorship of the American people.”
As the details of the suit spread on Twitter, so did the reactions. They were, you could say, less than flattering. The most essential point upon which criticisms rest are the same that anyone in politics has seen wielded in dozens of Twitter arguments: that censorship must come from the government. In other words, that it’s not a First Amendment issue if it’s not a government actor.
There are, of course, many other considerations in evaluating the suit’s merits.
Naturally, the punditry and #Resist crowds had the snarkiest and strongest reactions, but limiting the reaction pool to just experts yields nearly the same general tone: mockery and disdain.
We’ll start with the always-quotable George Conway and go from there.
I’ve skimmed former guy’s complaint against Facebook and it’s every bit as stupid as you’d think it is.
— George Conway (@gtconway3d) July 7, 2021
I’ve skimmed former guy’s complaint against Facebook and it’s every bit as stupid as you’d think it is.
— George Conway (@gtconway3d) July 7, 2021
It’s insane enough that he’s claiming Facebook’s a state actor. Yes, in extreme cases, if otherwise non-state actors are acting in cahoots with the government, they can become state actors. But that’s an absurdly hard thing to show, and nothing like that occurred here.
— George Conway (@gtconway3d) July 7, 2021
But what makes this meta-insane is that he’s claiming that the Facebook was a FEDERAL state actor because it was entangled with the FEDERAL government at a time when HE WAS PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.
— George Conway (@gtconway3d) July 7, 2021
The thread from Conway goes on, but he was not alone.
The very first word of the First Amendment is “Congress” (as in “shall make no law…”). That means the First Amendment applies to governmental actors, not private companies.
— Elie Honig (@eliehonig) July 7, 2021
Why Trump just wants a PR and fundraising moment, not a real lawsuit.
1) possibility of sworn depositions and discovery involving him and his closest aides/family
2) depending on claims alleged, potential anti-SLAPP damages in counterclaims
3) he’ll almost certainly lose
— Bradley P. Moss (@BradMossEsq) July 7, 2021
The First Amendment protects Trump supporters from government censorship and compelled speech. Yes.
The First Amendment also protects website owners from government censorship and compelled speech.
— Eric Owens (@ericowensdc) July 7, 2021
“Congress” shall make no law … Trump and his lawyers need to read the first line of the First Amendment. His lawsuit complaining of censorship against private social media companies and their leaders is going nowhere. https://t.co/Va6vNhWxpO
— Barb McQuade (@BarbMcQuade) July 7, 2021
When paragraph 3 of your lawsuit declares Facebook is the government pic.twitter.com/uvzAJ9BScN
— Devlin Barrett (@DevlinBarrett) July 7, 2021
The mental (noun) of this lawsuit also hinges on the premise that when Facebook suspended Trump, it did so as part of the government Trump *was then running* since he was still, you know, the president
— Devlin Barrett (@DevlinBarrett) July 7, 2021
This is of particular interest.
The Trump lawsuit challenging Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act refers to the “Community Decency Act,” which does not exist pic.twitter.com/cHZU9FBXe0
— Preston Byrne (@prestonjbyrne) July 7, 2021
A candidate for office in South Carolina had a short thread pertinent to the topic. Though not a legal expert, his business experience has some particular relevance.
March of 1996. I started my ISP biz providing Internet Access. Every customer agreed to abide by our Terms of Service(TOS). If you violated the TOS, you were warned. 2nd offense, a temp suspension. 3rd, you were disconnected and banned from using our services. 1/#ncpol
— Scott Huffman #EndTheFilibuster (@HuffmanForNC) July 7, 2021
Our TOS did not violate the 1st Amendment. It protected our infrastructure and other clients from the possible harm one could cause. Trump used social media to spread hate speech, lies and he violated the TOS of FaceBook, and Twitter. He was not censored. /2
— Scott Huffman #EndTheFilibuster (@HuffmanForNC) July 7, 2021
I received letters from a few clients and maybe their attorneys. Never once did they claim censorship or a violation of their 1st Amendment rights and never once were we sued for kicking them off our platform.
/3— Scott Huffman #EndTheFilibuster (@HuffmanForNC) July 7, 2021
And in conclusion, but without comment:
GOP fundraisers are having a field day with the Trump social media lawsuit. Also, peep the NRSC sticking with “5X MATCH” while Trump’s JFC switches to “5X-IMPACT” pic.twitter.com/GFV3kxZZVj
— Andrew Solender (@AndrewSolender) July 7, 2021
—
