Trump Plans to Sue Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg, Twitter's Jack Dorsey After Ban - Bloomberg
By: Naomi Nix (Bloomberg. com)
gee, I thought mango unchained was going to have his own social media company up and running by now. I guess that's probably happening in 2 weeks too.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Former President Donald Trump sued Facebook Inc., Twitter Inc., Alphabet Inc.'s Google and their chief executives, raising the stakes in his battle against social media giants who have blocked him.
Billing the effort during a Wednesday press conference as a move to defend First Amendment rights, Trump filed three separate class-action lawsuits in federal court in Florida against the tech giants and Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg, Twitter's Jack Dorsey and Google's Sundar Pichai.
The lawsuits seek court orders to restore his social-media accounts, along with punitive damages, to ensure other users can't be banned or flagged by the tech giants. The legal team is being led by John P. Coale, a trial attorney involved in lawsuits against big tobacco companies.
"We're going to hold big tech very accountable," Trump said during the press conference at his Trump National Golf Club Bedminster in New Jersey. "If they can do it to me, they can do it to anyone."
Twitter permanently banned Trump in January for his role in stoking the mob that attacked the U.S. Capitol Jan. 6 in a deadly riot to stop the counting of Electoral College votes for President Joe Biden. Facebook last month said Trump would remain suspended from its networks for at least two years, with the possibility of being reinstated in 2023 if risk to public safety has subsided.
YouTube, Google's giant video service, also froze Trump's account following the Jan. 6 riot. The former president's videos are still accessible, but he isn't permitted to post new videos. Susan Wojcicki, YouTube's chief executive, has said that the company will reverse its policy when it decides that the "risk of violence has decreased," without providing details.
Facebook, Google and Twitter declined to comment on the suits, which were criticized by tech-funded advocacy groups. NetChoice, whose members include Amazon and other tech companies, said the action shows a "deliberate misunderstanding of the First Amendment" and is without merit.
"President Trump has no case," NetChoice CEO Steve DelBianco said in a release. "The First Amendment is designed to protect the media from the President, not the other way around."
Trump is seeking to overturn a federal law that shields internet companies from liability for content posted by users. Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act protects social media platforms from lawsuits accusing them of unfairly removing posts or accounts, among other legal challenges. The First Amendment prohibits the government from forcing tech companies to leave up or take down certain categories of posts.
In the lawsuits, Trump argues the liability protections under Section 230 means social media companies should be considered government actors that can be sued.
The banishment of Trump by major tech platforms reignited Republican calls to revoke the legal shield, arguing that it has enabled social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter to censor conservative viewpoints.
The lawsuits aren't the first time Trump has taken aim at Section 230. While in office, he tried to get Congress to repeal Section 230 by threatening to veto a Defense Department spending bill. Democrats have also proposed bills to curtail the legal shield to encourage tech companies to more aggressively rid their platforms of bigotry, abuse, and harassment.
Tech companies have largely resisted changes to the law, fearing that the proliferation of lawsuits will force them to clamp down on the free-flowing user-generated content. However, both Zuckerberg and Dorsey have expressed openness in recent months to Section 230 reforms.
Without access to the broad reach afforded by social media giants, Trump has struggled to maintain an online presence. He shut down his blog-like "From the Desk of Donald J. Trump," though he frequently sends out several press statements a day -- often targeting fellow Republicans he believes are insufficiently loyal.
Trump recently stepped up his public activity by restarting rallies and making a trip to the southern U.S. border last week to criticize Biden's immigration policies. He's backing candidates in the 2022 midterm elections and actively opposing others. He has also held out the prospect of running again for president in 2024.
The former president has been teasing that he'll launch a new platform that can't remove him. He said on Dave Rubin's "Rubin Report" podcast on June 25 that "there's a lot of platforms out there, that's what we're looking at, getting the right platform, a perfect platform, and I think you'll see something fairly soon."
During his presidency, Trump used Twitter for everything from insulting rivals to major policy announcements, and he relied on Facebook especially to raise money from small-dollar donors.
A Florida law prohibiting social media platforms from suspending the accounts of political candidates was blocked by a federal judge earlier this month. Likening the state's law to "burning the house to roast a pig," U.S. District Judge Robert Hinkle in Tallahassee said the legislation passed by a Republican legislature and a priority of Governor Ron DeSantis, violates the companies' free speech rights.
The case is Trump et al v Twitter Inc et al, 21-cv-22441, U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida (Miami).
— With assistance by Mark Bergen, and Nico Grant
trolling, taunting, and off topic comments may be removed at the discretion of group mods. NT members that vote up their own comments or continue to disrupt the conversation risk having all of their comments deleted.
Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
Tags
Who is online
64 visitors
oh look, another legal fund raising scam perpetrated on his more than willing and gullible sycophants.
they deserve to lose their damn mo9ney
don't forget to vote this seed up. I'm getting buried by trumpsters on the front page.
thank you for your patriotism.
"It will be the bigliest most beautifullest social media platform EVER! YUGER than Face Book and Twitter put together!"
those social media muzzles are killing him, financially. bwah ha ha ha, loser!
The mostest, bigly, covfefe social network ever will be up and running in two weeks.
Right along with his infrastructure and medical/health care plans.
Let's see, coming on five years every two weeks the republicans had some great healthcare plan...
Now it is always some new social media platform...
They have gone from, try to silence me I will make my own to I will sue to get back with you all.
start the video at the 1:00 mark and watch trump babble. he's off the teleprompter.
may I quote Donald Trump
"when I said it , it was like a weapon went off. A major weapon. I won't use the word weapon. "
If Biden said that today Fox News would be talking about it for weeks.
He did. I think he was alluding to the possibility of nuking China if he gets back in office.
Oh ferfucksakes and Jesus H Christ!
Some of us would like to leave Planet Earth intact for our grandchildren!
I was just teasing about nuking China. I think. Who knows what the hell Trump was talking about when he mentioned "nuclear"? He was babbling.
that would really show iskanka and all her registered chinese trademarks!
ok...whew!
When Trump loses his lawsuit... not "if", "when"... the winning defendants would be able to go after him to recoup their costs, and possibly, their attorneys' fees.
gee, you'd think such a successful businessman would have a better grasp of the first amendment. /s
If the lawsuit is not instantly dismissed, the defendants' lawyers will be able to take Trump's deposition and ask him all about his activities regarding January 6th. That would be fun. Regardless, the lawsuit will be dismissed.
How did he find lawyers to work for him ? They must not care about getting paid.
Maybe they're hacks who've been trying to pass the bar for the last 10 years
His problem is that he is used to suing people who can’t fight back. You know, the blue collar workers that don’t have daddy’s money to fight it out in court.
Apparently he doesn’t realize that all of these companies are far more massive and wealthier than his, and several of these individuals can buy his entire life 10+ times over. He is not intimidating and he can’t wait them out, so his usual tactics will fail laughably.
Whah! Whaaa! They took my twitter. I am going to sue.
My God what a big baby. He is just pissed he is not the center of attention.
If they can do it to me, they can do it to anyone....
Of course they can you complete jackass. It is a private company.
So let me get this straight. According to some a company has the ability to deny gay people service. Gets to pick and choose its clientele. Then donald gets suspended and the faithful all jump up and down and say a company cannot discriminate against him. Meanwhile still keeping their idea of every other company being able to discriminate.
You have to ignore the hypocrisy. It's mindboggling
that's where that whole imperial presidency comes in so handy for them. the constitution or the 10 commandments don't apply to them when they're engaged in a holy war against the libs.
I think the trumpettes want an Il Duce, Mein Fureher, or a an El Presidente
All they have to do is say the two magical words... "religious freedom".
“Raising the stakes” is a rather strong way of putting it. These suits have already failed considering the law, SCOTUS precedent, and the Constitution are all lined up against them. Like always with Trump this is all for show and has no teeth.
What worries me was McConnell stacking the courts for the last four years.
Eh, not me so much. I would be astounded if they started ruling that corporations cannot enforce their policies on their own property.
I am gonna have faith in ya and what ya say. Haha
A free press means private media controls content.
The government cannot force private companies to give a voice to any content they disagree with, much less hate speech, disinformation or harmful foreign propaganda.
This is 5th Grade Social Studies material here folks!
In Canada, the courts can order in view of trivial claims or the likelihood of non-payment of court costs in the event of a plaintiff losing his case that the plaintiff must post a bond with the court to guarantee payment of costs including defendants' costs in the event the plaintiff loses. Trump has already been accused of stiffing rally sites and musicians for use of their music, besides his history of stiffing contractors on his realty projects. I think the defendants in this case should make that demand if American law permits it.
If as expected, this claim gets laughed out of the lower courts and appeals reach the SCOTUS it will be interesting to see how a Trump-stacked SCOTUS will deal with it.