Filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas Austin Division on April 8th, the complaint argues that because the Attorney General uses @KenPaxtonTX for “official purposes,” his account is a public forum and blocking users based on their viewpoint is a violation of the First Amendment.
On April 5th, the Supreme Court of the United States vacated the Second Circuit’s decision in Knight First Amendment Institute v. Donald Trump, a long-running lawsuit challenging former President Donald Trump’s pattern of blocking critics from his personal Twitter account, @realDonaldTrump.
A day before Joe Biden's inauguration, the Justice Department under Donald Trump made a last-minute effort to undo a major court decision related to public official's social media accounts.
A federal judge in Virginia dismissed one of Rep. Devin Nunes' (R-CA) defamation suits against The Washington Post, the Federal Aviation Agency released long-awaited drone guidelines, a British judge rejected the U.S. government's request to extradite Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, and more.
The lawsuit says that the President continues to exclude users who were blocked before his inaguration or cannot specify the tweet that provoked the block. According to the complaint, the President’s staff told the Knight Institute as recently as July 20nd that the President “does not intend to unblock persons who were blocked prior to his inauguration or who cannot identify a tweet that proceeded and allegedly precipitated the blocking.”
Represented by the Knight First Amendment Institute, the judges allege that the new policy amounts to an unconstitutional prior restraint. "There is an ongoing national debate about the wisdom and fairness of recent changes to immigration laws," the complaint says. "Immigration judges have unique insights to contribute to this discussion."
Knight First Amendment Institute, a leading press advocacy group, filed a lawsuit on April 2nd against the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) seeking the immediate release of documents related to policies governing CDC employees’ ability to speak to the press and the public about matters relating to the novel coronavirus.
"The critical question in this case is not the nature of the Account when it was set up a decade ago. The critical question for First Amendment purposes is how the President uses the Account in his capacity as President," Judge Barrington Parker wrote.