# Is Twitter-blocking by The President a violation of the 1st Amendment? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 7, 2017, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-twitter-blocking-by-the-president-a-violation-of-the-1st-amendment/788366 "2017-06-07T16:47:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2017, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-twitter-blocking-by-the-president-a-violation-of-the-1st-amendment/788366/1 "2017-06-07T16:47:43Z")
[Interesting essay from the _Consumerist_](https://consumerist.com/2017/06/07/is-getting-twitter-blocked-by-the-president-a-violation-of-your-first-amendment-rights/) website seems to indicate that the answer is more complicated than it seems. To dumb-down the article, on the one hand Twitter’s rules allow you, as a private citizen, to block anyone for any reason. On the other hand The President just isn’t any average private citizen-He is a very high official that _every_ citizen should have the right to directly praise or condemn as the need arises. As a letter sent to him said > [@](#): > > “Dear President Trump,” the letter begins. “Your vigorous use of Twitter to comment about matters mundane as well as momentous has afforded Americans valuable insight into your policies, actions, and beliefs.” > But, it continues, that means that the Presidential accounts are a “‘designated public forum’ for First Amendment purposes,” and therefore “the viewpoint-based blocking” of individuals who “disagreed with, criticized, or mocked you or your actions as President” is unconstitutional. The other problem, aside from him not hearing from citizens that disagree with him is that > [@](#): > > Not only can people the President has blocked not interact with him, the Knight Foundation points out, but also they have a very hard time seeing what he is saying: They cannot view his Tweets on his timeline, nor can they easily find them in search results. In my opinion, he is treating what he is using as a primary(and thus, semi-governmental) means of communication as he did/does his pep rallies-letting the fans in and kicking out the naysayers. Now, I am not a lawyer and cannot comment authoritatively on whether this is legal, but I certainly find it unethical at the very least. What say you? ---
**Author:** ![iamthewalrus\_3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/258eb7/32.png) [@iamthewalrus\_3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iamthewalrus_3)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2017, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-twitter-blocking-by-the-president-a-violation-of-the-1st-amendment/788366/2 "2017-06-07T17:09:22Z")
I don’t think so. The First Amendment guarantees a right to speech, not a right to be heard. You have the right to petition for a redress of grievances, but not a right to actually receive redress. Grieve away! > [@The article](#): > > Not only can people the President has blocked not interact with him, the Knight Foundation points out, but also they have a very hard time seeing what he is saying: They cannot view his Tweets on his timeline, nor can they easily find them in search results. This is dumb. It’s trivial to read someone’s tweets if you’ve been blocked. You make another twitter account (it’s free!) and follow them passively with that account. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2017, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-twitter-blocking-by-the-president-a-violation-of-the-1st-amendment/788366/3 "2017-06-07T17:22:43Z")
> [@iamthewalrus\_3](#): > > I don’t think so. The First Amendment guarantees a right to speech, not a right to be heard. You have the right to petition for a redress of grievances, but not a right to actually receive redress. Grieve away! In this case, the President is blocking citizens he finds unfavorable from directly addressing him using the means of communication he seems to favor the most. I don’t think the First Amendment works if your right to communicate with a branch of the Government is curtailed to this extent. It’s like saying "We are letting you type whatever you want to The President…but it’s not going to get anywhere near him. Enjoy your “Free Speech”! What are the consequences if he blocks certain members of Congress or judges from SCOTUS from contacting him via his favorite method of communication? ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2017, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-twitter-blocking-by-the-president-a-violation-of-the-1st-amendment/788366/4 "2017-06-07T17:44:33Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > In this case, the President is blocking citizens he finds unfavorable from directly addressing him using the means of communication he seems to favor the most. What’s Barack Obama’s phone number? I mean, I hate Donald Trump as much as the next guy but c’mon. “He seems to favor the most” is a rather vague thing to hang a court case on. No one has unfettered access of communication to the President; you don’t know Obama’s cell phone number, George W. Bush could have blocked anyone’s email address from his .gov account, and you couldn’t just stroll in to the Oval Office during the Reagan administration to give him a piece of your mind. The right to petition the government does not give someone unfettered access to the President via any medium of their choosing. > [@](#): > > What are the consequences if he blocks certain members of Congress or judges from SCOTUS from contacting him via his favorite method of communication? If members of Congress are trying to reach him through Twitter they’re idiots, and the SCOTUS shouldn’t be calling him up at all, so that’s a strange question to ask. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2017, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-twitter-blocking-by-the-president-a-violation-of-the-1st-amendment/788366/5 "2017-06-07T17:45:39Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > In this case, the President is blocking citizens he finds unfavorable from directly addressing him using the means of communication he seems to favor the most. What’s Barack Obama’s phone number? I mean, I hate Donald Trump as much as the next guy but c’mon. “He seems to favor the most” is a rather vague thing to hang a court case on. No one has unfettered access of communication to the President; you don’t know Obama’s cell phone number, George W. Bush could have blocked anyone’s email address from his .gov account, and you couldn’t just stroll in to the Oval Office during the Reagan administration to give him a piece of your mind. The right to petition the government does not give someone unfettered access to the President via any medium of their choosing. FDR’s “favored” means of communication was the radio, but you could not have sued to force him to listen to your radio broadcast. > [@](#): > > What are the consequences if he blocks certain members of Congress or judges from SCOTUS from contacting him via his favorite method of communication? If members of Congress are trying to reach him through Twitter they’re idiots, and the SCOTUS shouldn’t be calling him up at all, so that’s a strange question to ask. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2017, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-twitter-blocking-by-the-president-a-violation-of-the-1st-amendment/788366/6 "2017-06-07T17:49:54Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > What’s Barack Obama’s phone number? The more appropriate question is whether Obama refused to give anyone his phone number as a result of viewpoint-based discrimination. Trump doesn’t have to Tweet, or read anyone else’s Tweets, but arguably he has an obligation to allow equal access to all members of the public at least with respect to the content of their comments. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2017, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-twitter-blocking-by-the-president-a-violation-of-the-1st-amendment/788366/7 "2017-06-07T18:02:33Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > What’s Barack Obama’s phone number? > > I mean, I hate Donald Trump as much as the next guy but c’mon. “He seems to favor the most” is a rather vague thing to hang a court case on. No one has unfettered access of communication to the President; you don’t know Obama’s cell phone number, George W. Bush could have blocked anyone’s email address from his .gov account, and you couldn’t just stroll in to the Oval Office during the Reagan administration to give him a piece of your mind. > > The right to petition the government does not give someone unfettered access to the President via any medium of their choosing. 1. I could have sworn I said that I was not qualified to judge on the legality of the situation, but was also concerned about the _ethics_ of this situation. 2. I don’t believe I asked for _unfettered_ access-cutting off what might very well be an ordinary citizen’s _primary_ access to this President so that(for the most part) eventually the whole fucking country is an echo chamber for his actions and view as far as he is concerned is disconcerting to me. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2017, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-twitter-blocking-by-the-president-a-violation-of-the-1st-amendment/788366/8 "2017-06-07T18:22:29Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Now, I am not a lawyer and cannot comment authoritatively on whether this is legal, but I certainly find it unethical at the very least. Shocker. > [@](#): > > What say you? There is no First Amendment right to follow the President on Twitter. No court has ever considered the First Amendment’s right of petition (or any right contained therein) so expansively as to infer that the blocking of particular people could constitute viewpoint discrimination. Of course, the law is always evolving, and a future Twitter-product may be so immersed in the very lives of our citizenry that meaningful communication of any kind is impossible without it. At that point, perhaps a short hovercar ride over to your lawyer, just recently back from the Lunar Spa, would produce a viable First Amendment complaint. But not in this century. Ethically, I don’t see Trump has any ethical boundaries I recognize, and even if he did, this isn’t one I’d find appalling if he lacked. ---
**Author:** ![Leaper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4bbf92/32.png) [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2017, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-twitter-blocking-by-the-president-a-violation-of-the-1st-amendment/788366/9 "2017-06-07T18:24:04Z")
Does it make any difference that there is now a segment of Americans that cannot directly read what the Press Secretary called official communications from the President? ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2017, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-twitter-blocking-by-the-president-a-violation-of-the-1st-amendment/788366/10 "2017-06-07T18:44:24Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > In this case, the President is blocking citizens he finds unfavorable from directly addressing him using the means of communication he seems to favor the most. There isn’t any First Amendment right to directly address the President. > [@](#): > > It’s like saying "We are letting you type whatever you want to The President…but it’s not going to get anywhere near him. Enjoy your “Free Speech”! Yes, it’s a lot like that. It’s also a lot like writing a letter - I doubt any politician at the national level spends his time reading everything people send him. > [@](#): > > What are the consequences if he blocks certain members of Congress or judges from SCOTUS from contacting him via his favorite method of communication? They will have to send an email to Hillary, and Putin will forward it to Trump within the hour. Easy-peasy. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Yllaria](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yllaria/32/3452_2.png) [@Yllaria](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yllaria)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2017, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-twitter-blocking-by-the-president-a-violation-of-the-1st-amendment/788366/11 "2017-06-07T18:46:52Z")
I wouldn’t see it as a first amendment problem, but it might be an access to government information problem. I’m not sure what regulations would apply. The WH could guarantee access by making all of his tweets available on a separate site, one with no reply function. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2017, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-twitter-blocking-by-the-president-a-violation-of-the-1st-amendment/788366/12 "2017-06-07T18:59:48Z")
Is the Twitter account for personal use and thus The President is perfectly right in making personal decisions to block people from attempting to give their opinions on his actions? I think this quote from the linked article shows that he is using it as an _official_ communications channel: > [@](#): > > The President uses his personal Twitter account to express what are clearly personal opinions, such as his rant yesterday against the “Fake News of CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS, washpost or nytimes.” > > But he also regularly blends the professional and the personal. For him, the two are intertwined inextricably. Just this morning, for example, he used the platform to formally announce his next choice for Director of the FBI, Christopher Wray. > > Since the beginning of the administration, it has been comparatively unclear whether everyone else in the world should consider presidential Tweets from Trump’s personal account to be official statements or not. But then White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer helpfully confirmed just this week that anything Trump Tweets is as official as it gets. > > “The President is President of the United States,” Spicer said in a press briefing Tuesday, “so they are considered official statements by the President of the United States.” That’s right-his own press secretary states The President’s _personal_ Twitter account is being used to release _official_ statements, and that _anything_ that he Tweets is to be considered an official statement from the President. BTW, how secure IS that Twitter account? ---
**Author:** ![Fenris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fenris/32/498_2.png) [@Fenris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fenris)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2017, 8:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-twitter-blocking-by-the-president-a-violation-of-the-1st-amendment/788366/13 "2017-06-07T20:46:26Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Is the Twitter account for personal use and thus The President is perfectly right in making personal decisions to block people from attempting to give their opinions on his actions? We don’t know. Why don’t you toddle along and go do some primary research rather than expecting others to do your homework for you? > [@](#): > > BTW, how secure IS that Twitter account? We don’t know. Why don’t you toddle along and go do some primary research rather than expecting others to do your homework for you? And in response to the OP, it’s a stupid question on the face of it, but the obvious answer is "No. Of course not. :rolleyes: " ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2017, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-twitter-blocking-by-the-president-a-violation-of-the-1st-amendment/788366/14 "2017-06-07T20:58:45Z")
I’m obviously not a fan of the Trumpster fire, but his Twitter account is his Twitter account. Seems to me he can block whoever the hell he wants. Are we to suggest that he can’t block all of those fake accounts? I’m not even sure I buy into the argument that his tweets are subject to public records laws. I’m not a constitutional lawyer but I think that even president can have his own personal accounts and use them however he chooses. That account predated his presidency. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2017, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-twitter-blocking-by-the-president-a-violation-of-the-1st-amendment/788366/15 "2017-06-07T21:20:54Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > I’m obviously not a fan of the Trumpster fire, but his Twitter account is his Twitter account. Seems to me he can block whoever the hell he wants. Are we to suggest that he can’t block all of those fake accounts? > > I’m not even sure I buy into the argument that his tweets are subject to public records laws. I’m not a constitutional lawyer but I think that even president can have his own personal accounts and use them however he chooses. That account predated his presidency. I’m sorry, but I distinctly remember posting a direct quote from the President’s own press secretary that stated that anything posted from his so-called “private” Twitter is to considered > [@](#): > > …official statements by the President of the United States This puts it far beyond the personal conversation level, I think. ---
**Author:** ![iamthewalrus\_3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/258eb7/32.png) [@iamthewalrus\_3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iamthewalrus_3)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2017, 9:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-twitter-blocking-by-the-president-a-violation-of-the-1st-amendment/788366/16 "2017-06-07T21:32:49Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > In this case, the President is blocking citizens he finds unfavorable from directly addressing him using the means of communication he seems to favor the most. I’m not sure I buy that twitter is his favorite means of communication, but even if it is, I don’t see how any of that violates the First Amendment. > [@](#): > > I don’t think the First Amendment works if your right to communicate with a branch of the Government is curtailed to this extent. You don’t have a First Amendment right to communicate with the government. You have a right to do certain things, but _communication_ is a two-party process, and you don’t have a right to force the other party to do anything. Your right is to not to have the government stop you from trying. There’s no right to make them listen. The First Amendment doesn’t require anyone in the government to open mail you send to them, to answer the phone when you call, or to read the sign you’re carrying as you parade outside their windows. It protects your right to _do_ all those things. Whether you get your message across isn’t part of it. > [@](#): > > It’s like saying "We are letting you type whatever you want to The President…but it’s not going to get anywhere near him. Enjoy your “Free Speech”! It is in fact just like that. And so what. I don’t see that as appreciably different from any other President. It’s not like random citizens get to call and talk to the President on the phone. If he’s _blocking_ them on twitter, it’s probably because he read at least one thing that they said to him he didn’t like. That’s _vastly_ more communication than most critics of most presidents get! > [@](#): > > What are the consequences if he blocks certain members of Congress or judges from SCOTUS from contacting him via his favorite method of communication? Nothing? You keep mentioning that twitter is his favorite method of communication as though that were legally relevant. I’m not convinced it is. If the telephone were his favorite method of communication, would refusing to answer based on caller ID be a violation of the First Amendment, in your conception of it? ---
**Author:** ![mikecurtis](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mikecurtis/32/3284_2.png) [@mikecurtis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mikecurtis)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2017, 10:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-twitter-blocking-by-the-president-a-violation-of-the-1st-amendment/788366/17 "2017-06-07T22:13:31Z")
> [@Leaper](#): > > Does it make any difference that there is now a segment of Americans that cannot directly read what the Press Secretary called official communications from the President? I am not a twitterer and i can read what the President tweets, anyone at anytime can go to twitter and read away to their hearts contentent ie: > [@](#): > > Getting ready to leave for Cincinnati, in the GREAT STATE of OHIO, to meet with ObamaCare victims and talk Healthcare & also Infrastructure! and twitter is not the only (or even the preferred) method of petitioning the President, so no harm no foul. mc ---
**Author:** ![Anny\_Middon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/bc79bd/32.png) [@Anny\_Middon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Anny_Middon)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2017, 10:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-twitter-blocking-by-the-president-a-violation-of-the-1st-amendment/788366/18 "2017-06-07T22:23:50Z")
Why doesn’t the White House disable all comments on his tweets? I’m serious. If he doesn’t allow comments that disagree with him, what value is there to the comments except to stroke his fragile ego? (OK, I suspect that’s exactly what President Snowflake wants, but I don’t think it’s healthy.) ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2017, 10:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-twitter-blocking-by-the-president-a-violation-of-the-1st-amendment/788366/19 "2017-06-07T22:32:55Z")
No. Just like you can’t force him to read your mail. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2017, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-twitter-blocking-by-the-president-a-violation-of-the-1st-amendment/788366/20 "2017-06-07T22:33:36Z")
> [@Leaper](#): > > Does it make any difference that there is now a segment of Americans that cannot directly read what the Press Secretary called official communications from the President? What do you mean they can’t read it? I don’t have a Twitter account _at all_ and I can read his tweets: [x.com](https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump) I suppose “a segment of Americans” without computers / smart phones / Internet access can’t read them either, but the same lack-of-access argument could have been made about Americans who didn’t own a television back in JFK’s day, or a radio in FDR’s day, or were illiterate in Washington’s day. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-twitter-blocking-by-the-president-a-violation-of-the-1st-amendment/788366.md?page=2)