Message from @Ivanfr
Discord ID: 449077065858285568
Donald Trump's twitter is not the government.
This is your statement, and i am asking at what point does his private actions cross a line and become government actions because of their nature or intent
Twitter can sell the company to China
xD
Your argument HINGES on proving that Twitter is an open public forum.
and your counter argument hinges on trump not always being president while in office
so, can trump order a private security firm, with his own money, to block people from going to a public forum.
not necessarily twitter
just any open public forum
You just conceded that my argument DOESN'T hinge on that.
Besides
Question: Does free speech require being able to tie your speech as a response to the tweet you are tweeting about in this case?
^ ^ ^ ^ bingo.
why do you keep dodging?
@Grenade123 I dont think even the secret service can block u from being on an open forum
unless they arrest u
No one can legally unless you pose a threat.
the secret service could not legally do it. But a private security contractor might, depending on where the open forum actually is.
He isn't blocking people from going to twitter though
@Grenade123 then u can take legal action against them
and maybe they will assault you
but then u sue them
can you? like i said, it depends on where the open forum is. It could be hosted on private land that just usually lets people speak their mind. but perhaps you get banned from the premise. If its not the government banning you, but the people who own it, then you have no legal case of being allowed on the premises
then its not a public forum
Then its not an open public forum
"A "traditional", or "open, public forum" is a place with a long tradition of freedom of expression, such as a public park or a street corner. The government can normally impose only content-neutral time, place, and manner restrictions on speech in a public forum. Restrictions on speech in a public forum that are based on content will be struck down, unless the government can show the restriction is necessary to further a compelling governmental interest."
no where in there does it say it has to be public land to count as a public forum.
a private college campus comes to mind
Bad example lol
How is a Twitter Account a place with a 'long tradition of freedom of expression'?
obviously private land is not a open public forum
I can ban anyone from my house
@Ivanfr tell me where, in that definition of an open public forum, it says it has to be public property?
in the word "public"
which is the opposite of "privaet"
"A public forum is a place that has, by tradition or practice, been held out for general **use** by the public **for speech-related purposes.**"
it doesn't have to be public land.
"To determine which of the standards of student expression applies in a given case, many courts first conduct a "public forum analysis." The public forum analysis determines whether individuals may have access to places for communicative purposes."
if it was, then why would an analysis be necessary?
Tim gave an example earlier of a case where an established private park was not allowed to kick people who were expressing their first amendment right off. I forget the name of the park, but examples exist.
No private land is this " been held out for general use by the public for speech-related purposes."
by definition