Sign up for our daily briefing
Make your busy days simpler with Axios AM/PM. Catch up on what's new and why it matters in just 5 minutes.
Stay on top of the latest market trends
Subscribe to Axios Markets for the latest market trends and economic insights. Sign up for free.
Sports news worthy of your time
Binge on the stats and stories that drive the sports world with Axios Sports. Sign up for free.
Tech news worthy of your time
Get our smart take on technology from the Valley and D.C. with Axios Login. Sign up for free.
Get the inside stories
Get an insider's guide to the new White House with Axios Sneak Peek. Sign up for free.
Catch up on coronavirus stories and special reports, curated by Mike Allen everyday
Catch up on coronavirus stories and special reports, curated by Mike Allen everyday
Want a daily digest of the top Denver news?
Get a daily digest of the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Denver
Want a daily digest of the top Des Moines news?
Get a daily digest of the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Des Moines
Want a daily digest of the top Twin Cities news?
Get a daily digest of the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Twin Cities
Want a daily digest of the top Tampa Bay news?
Get a daily digest of the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Tampa Bay
Want a daily digest of the top Charlotte news?
Get a daily digest of the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Charlotte
Photo: NurPhoto / Contributor/Getty Images
A federal appeals court on Tuesday ruled that President Trump violated the Constitution in blocking critics of his viewpoints on Twitter.
Why it matters: This is a huge win for free speech advocates. The ruling sets a precedent that any elected official — from a local mayor to the president — who blocks a constituent on Twitter could be found guilty of violating that constituent's First Amendment rights.
Details: Tuesday's decision by the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in New York aligns with an earlier decision by the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals in Virginia that ruled government officials can't block constituents on social media accounts that they use for official business, based on its interpretation of the First Amendment.
- In its ruling, the 2nd Circuit held that: "The First Amendment does not permit a public official who utilizes a social media account for all manner of official purposes to exclude persons from an otherwise open online dialogue because they expressed views with which the official disagrees."
Between the lines: The White House had appealed the district court case on the grounds that the president was using the @realDonaldTrump Twitter handle, not his official @POTUS45 government handle, and thus the president has the right to block whomever he wants. The 2nd Circuit panel rejected that argument.
- "President Trump established his account, with the handle @realDonaldTrump, (the “Account”) in March 2009," the ruling reads.
- "No one disputes that before he became President the Account was a purely private one or that once he leaves office the Account will presumably revert to its private status. This litigation concerns what the Account is now ... The public presentation of the Account and the webpage associated with it bear all the trappings of an official, state‐run account."
The big picture: President Trump's consistent attacks on the press and access to information, mostly on social media, have forced judges to re-evaluate the rules of political communications in the digital era.
Go deeper: Trump's unexpected 1st Amendment legacy
Editor’s note: This post has been corrected to show that the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals ruling aligns with an earlier ruling by 4th Circuit Court of Appeals on whether public officials could block critics from social media accounts (the 2nd Circuit did not uphold the 4th Circuit's ruling).