Twitter appears to be en route to the US Supreme Court in pursuit of absolution for its desire to keep Donald Trump abreast of a government warrant. Basically, around this time last year, a federal court ordered the social media platform now known as x to turn over Trump’s file, but not to tell the former president about it. And Twitter was none too keen on being silenced. So it fought back. Twitter objected on First Amendment grounds claiming a right to alert Trump who may elect to try to fight the disclosure. Now this argument are in the ire of the court, in addition to a $350,000 fine for Twitter. And even though the social media platform ultimately gave prosecutors Trump’s smile, Twitter has continued to fight the matter. After losing again last week in the DC Court of Appeals, well, it’s likely to challenge that fine, and it’s for silence in the US Supreme Court. Now, while I am no fan of Donald Trump, or what’s become of Twitter, I firmly believe that the First Amendment deserves defense here. And I’m glad that Twitter is investing resources in pushing back. Our justice system cannot simply trim a little fat off the constitution to hold Trump accountable. We must play by the rules to foremost, I completely and totally recognize that Twitter does not have standing here or any legal right really to challenge the warrant itself. That’s between Trump and DOJ. Also, I’m not even going to touch an executive privilege argument as that is a complete farce. But I will affirm that Twitter has a First Amendment right to use its voice without an unjustified government interference. That’s kind of how that first amendment thing works. Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech. That right can’t be curtailed or trampled simply because the defendant is not really a good person there is abhorrent and he engages in undemocratic behavior. What would it say if we can don’t unconstitutional acts in pursuit of punishing someone who has undermined the Constitution itself? We really be no better than Trump in that case. No. Now in this case, some may question Twitter’s motivation to litigate given the role social media played in Trump galvanizing his minions on January 6, or given the fascist the Jason antics and which Twitter’s owner Elon Musk regularly seems to engage in regardless, social media platforms have a vested interest in not being forced by the government to stay silent. We the people all do. There must be a constitutionally compelling reason to justify the limiting of speech. And I appreciate that Twitter is pushing to ensure that sufficient justification is present here. Now all that being said, I agree with the DC federal courts and I think that there was sufficient justification to curb Twitter speech here. prosecuting a former president is unprecedented and it definitely raises national security implications. And disclosing data would likely have jeopardized the prosecutor’s investigation. Whether the US Supreme Court agrees with me well, that is yet to be seen. Until then we must uphold the US Constitution without exception or fail. Because if we don’t, how can we expect to hold individuals like Donald Trump accountable for failing to do so?
Adrienne Lawrence
Legal analyst, law professor & award-winning author
Commentary
Our commentary partners will help you reach your own conclusions on complex topics.
Is the US looking for a war?
7 hrs ago
Peter Zeihan
How future generations could shift US support for Israel
Yesterday
Peter Zeihan
Why election of European Commission president is so important
Wednesday
Peter Zeihan
‘Both completely corrupt’: What Americans think of Biden, Trump
Tuesday
Dr. Frank Luntz
Twitter, now X, can use its voice without government meddling
Adrienne Lawrence
Legal analyst, law professor & award-winning author
By Straight Arrow News
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals has declined to reconsider a previous ruling that permitted special prosecutor Jack Smith to use a search warrant to access former President Donald Trump’s private Twitter feed without Trump’s knowledge. This warrant, served against Twitter (now known as X), was a part of a criminal investigation into Trump’s efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election. Initially, Twitter resisted compliance with the warrant and later sought a rehearing of the case.
Although Twitter lacks a legal right to challenge the warrant, Straight Arrow News contributor Adrienne Lawrence asserts that the social media platform is obligated to defend its First Amendment rights in its ongoing dispute with the U.S. Justice Department.
Twitter appears to be en route to the U.S. Supreme Court in pursuit of absolution for its desire to keep Donald Trump abreast of a government warrant. Basically, around this time last year, a federal court ordered the social media platform, now known as X, to turn over Trump’s file, but not to tell the former president about it. And Twitter was none too keen on being silenced. So it fought back.
Twitter objected on First Amendment grounds, claiming a right to alert Trump, who may elect to try to fight the disclosure. Now this argument earned the ire of the court, in addition to a $350,000 fine for Twitter. And even though the social media platform ultimately gave prosecutors Trump’s file, Twitter has continued to fight the matter. After losing again last week in the D.C. Court of Appeals, well, it’s likely to challenge that fine and its forced silence in the U.S. Supreme Court.
Now, while I am no fan of Donald Trump, or what’s become of Twitter, I firmly believe that the First Amendment deserves defense here. And I’m glad that Twitter is investing resources in pushing back. Our justice system cannot simply trim a little fat off the Constitution to hold Trump accountable. We must play by the rules, too. Foremost, I completely and totally recognize that Twitter does not have standing here or any legal right really to challenge the warrant itself. That’s between Trump and DOJ. Also, I’m not even going to touch an executive privilege argument, as that is a complete farce. But I will affirm that Twitter has a First Amendment right to use its voice without unjustified government interference. That’s kind of how that First Amendment thing works.
Twitter appears to be en route to the US Supreme Court in pursuit of absolution for its desire to keep Donald Trump abreast of a government warrant. Basically, around this time last year, a federal court ordered the social media platform now known as x to turn over Trump’s file, but not to tell the former president about it. And Twitter was none too keen on being silenced. So it fought back. Twitter objected on First Amendment grounds claiming a right to alert Trump who may elect to try to fight the disclosure. Now this argument are in the ire of the court, in addition to a $350,000 fine for Twitter. And even though the social media platform ultimately gave prosecutors Trump’s smile, Twitter has continued to fight the matter. After losing again last week in the DC Court of Appeals, well, it’s likely to challenge that fine, and it’s for silence in the US Supreme Court. Now, while I am no fan of Donald Trump, or what’s become of Twitter, I firmly believe that the First Amendment deserves defense here. And I’m glad that Twitter is investing resources in pushing back. Our justice system cannot simply trim a little fat off the constitution to hold Trump accountable. We must play by the rules to foremost, I completely and totally recognize that Twitter does not have standing here or any legal right really to challenge the warrant itself. That’s between Trump and DOJ. Also, I’m not even going to touch an executive privilege argument as that is a complete farce. But I will affirm that Twitter has a First Amendment right to use its voice without an unjustified government interference. That’s kind of how that first amendment thing works. Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech. That right can’t be curtailed or trampled simply because the defendant is not really a good person there is abhorrent and he engages in undemocratic behavior. What would it say if we can don’t unconstitutional acts in pursuit of punishing someone who has undermined the Constitution itself? We really be no better than Trump in that case. No. Now in this case, some may question Twitter’s motivation to litigate given the role social media played in Trump galvanizing his minions on January 6, or given the fascist the Jason antics and which Twitter’s owner Elon Musk regularly seems to engage in regardless, social media platforms have a vested interest in not being forced by the government to stay silent. We the people all do. There must be a constitutionally compelling reason to justify the limiting of speech. And I appreciate that Twitter is pushing to ensure that sufficient justification is present here. Now all that being said, I agree with the DC federal courts and I think that there was sufficient justification to curb Twitter speech here. prosecuting a former president is unprecedented and it definitely raises national security implications. And disclosing data would likely have jeopardized the prosecutor’s investigation. Whether the US Supreme Court agrees with me well, that is yet to be seen. Until then we must uphold the US Constitution without exception or fail. Because if we don’t, how can we expect to hold individuals like Donald Trump accountable for failing to do so?
Trump-Vance ticket will implement nationwide abortion ban
Donald Trump recently accepted the Republican nomination for president and named Sen. J.D. Vance, R-Ohio, as his running mate. Vance has previously advocated for strict anti-abortion laws, in sharp contrast to Kamala Harris, the leading Democratic candidate, who went on a nationwide tour to mobilize pro-choice voters. Watch the above video as Straight Arrow News…
Wednesday
End of Chevron is an open invite for corporate corruption
On June 28, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned 40 years of “Chevron deference” in a landmark ruling that experts say will cause a “legal earthquake.” The 6-3 conservative opinion upends a long tradition of relying on neutral expertise to interpret and execute laws and regulations. Broadly speaking, the ruling empowers judges and corporations at the…
Jul 17
American democracy cannot survive if Trump wins
Public alarm over the chances of democracy surviving in America has reached a new high-water mark in the wake of the Supreme Court’s July 1 ruling in Trump v. United States, where the court expanded presidential powers for all current and future U.S. presidents. Among other things, the court may have granted U.S. presidents the…
Jul 10
Talk to your kids about sextortion
The FBI is warning Americans of a growing threat called sextortion, where online predators pose as young, single individuals to lure their victims, primarily single teenage boys, into a blackmail trap. After soliciting sexual photos or videos of the victim, the predator threatens to release the images or videos unless the victim sends money and/or…
Jul 3
Louisiana’s Ten Commandments law proves Gov. Landry is corrupt
On June 20, GOP Gov. Jeff Landry of Louisiana signed into law a new bill that requires all public Louisiana school and university classrooms to display a poster-sized printout of the Bible’s Ten Commandments. The law violates existing legal precedents regarding the First Amendment and is expected to be challenged in the Supreme Court, although…
Jun 26
Underreported stories from each side
Group accuses Pa. teachers union of illegally using money to back Shapiro’s 2022 campaign
8 sources | 0% from the left
Getty Images
Some House Republicans slam Vance as Trump’s VP pick: ‘The worst choice’
8 sources | 0% from the right
Reuters
Latest Stories
Congress still trying to figure out how to reduce wasteful military spending
Watch 2:29
2 hrs ago
US Navy, Air Force making waves with new weapons at RIMPAC
Watch 6:03
2 hrs ago
Israeli PM Netanyahu meets with Trump at Mar-a-Lago
Watch 2:54
2 hrs ago
Growing US nuclear power resurgence reaches the nation’s heartland
Watch 1:19
2 hrs ago
Beer from the sun, other solar thermal projects get government funding
Watch 2:04
2 hrs ago
Popular Opinions
In addition to the facts, we believe it’s vital to hear perspectives from all sides of the political spectrum.
Trump has an excellent opportunity with Black voters
8 hrs ago
Star Parker
Don’t fall for GOP’s cheap racist attacks on Kamala Harris
9 hrs ago
Dr. Rashad Richey
Americans must reject Trump to defend our democracy
Yesterday
Jordan Reid
Why all the changes in European parliamentary governments?
Wednesday
Newt Gingrich