Politicians have no business blocking critics on Twitter and Facebook
AOC saw the light, way over on the left, and it sure would be nice if President Donald Trump saw it, too, way over on the right.
No elected official, left or right, should be in the business of curtailing free speech.
On Monday, U.S. Rep. Alexandria OcasioCortez, the progressive firebrand from New York, settled a lawsuit that accused her of blocking Twitter users from her @AOC account just because they were critical of or disagreed with her.
Ocasio-Cortez backed off and even apologized, as the settlement may have required, saying the fellow who sued her “has a First
Amendment right to express his views and should not be blocked for them.” Blocking him, she continued, “was wrong and improper and does not reflect the values I cherish.”
Now if only Trump, who was sued by a group of Twitter users two years ago for blocking them, would apologize as well. The courts have ruled that Trump and his lawyers don’t have a constitutional leg to stand on, but he has not conceded the point. That would not be his way.
Ocasio-Cortez’s gracious retreat, as well as the court rulings in the Trump case, could do much to shape the outcome in a burgeoning number of similar lawsuits, all challenging the right of elected officials to pick and choose their social media audience.
A federal court of appeals ruled in January that a Virginia politician could not bar critics from his Facebook pages, but a different court ruled in April that Kentucky Gov. Matt Bevin can block constituents on Facebook and Twitter.
The heart of the matter is clear. When an elected official uses Twitter or Facebook to discuss the public’s business, such as explaining a policy proposal or calling for legislation, that social media account becomes a “public forum” in the eyes of the
First Amendment.
Everybody and anybody must be allowed to follow the conversation and weigh in, within the general rules of civility and decency established by the social media platforms themselves. An elected official who blocks dissenting views is guilty of government censorship.
Ocasio-Cortez, who has 5.7 million followers on Twitter, was sued by a former New York State assemblyman, Dov Hikind, who regularly replied critically to her tweets, after she blocked him on July 8. Because Ocasio-Cortez often used her Twitter account to discuss public policies, Hikind argued, she could not “suppress contrary views.”
Her Twitter account, that is to say, was an extension of her office.
Trump, who has more than 66 million Twitter followers, was sued by the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, on behalf of users who had been blocked. One plaintiff had been blocked after calling Trump a “#fakeleader.”
“President Trump’s Twitter account has become an important source of news and information about the government and an important forum for speech by, to, or about the president,” Jameel Jaffer, executive director of the Knight Institute, said at the time. “The First Amendment applies to this digital forum in the same way it applies to town halls and open school board meetings.”
That said, there must be a way to boot the real jerks — and there is.
If a member of Congress holds a town hall meeting, he or she is not allowed to bar constituents who may express contrary views. But if somebody at the meeting starts screaming or making threats, it is appropriate for a guard to throw the person out.
In the same way, an elected leader can’t block critics on Twitter or Facebook without running afoul of the First Amendment, but monitors for the online platform can and should serve as that guard at the door.
Criticism is one thing. Harassment, abuse and threats are quite another.
Twitter’s user policies forbid harassment and other behavior that “manipulates or disrupts people’s experience on Twitter” — and those policies should be enforced. Facebook has moderation guidelines, as well, that should be enforced.
Obviously, the rules must be applied without partisan bias.
Too many Americans live in echo chambers, absorbing only media that reinforces their beliefs and biases.
We really don’t need elected officials doing the same.