7-10-190

Asked where his lawsuit would be filed and whether other plaintiffs would be involved, Hikind told Fox News in an email, "All that’s being determined at the moment."

"Most likely we will be [the] only plaintiff, but [we will be] citing other examples," Hikind continued. "The claim is [the] same as [the] one against Trump. She uses that account for political/policy commentary, so to shut a citizen off from her statements is a problem -- as well as blocking me from petitioning her or seeking redress."

Fox News is told the lawsuit would likely focus on Ocasio-Cortez's popular and active @AOC account, which has more than 4.

6 million followers. Ocasio-Cortez maintains a much smaller and rarely used official account, @RepAOC, with only 171,000 followers, but uses her personal @AOC account to discuss politics and engage with constituents and colleagues regularly.

For example, the top post pinned to Ocasio-Cortez's @AOC feed states, "A #GreenNewDeal is our plan for a world and a future worth fighting for." On July 5, she wrote to Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, "Thank you, @SenSanders. It’s an honor to work alongside you and the millions of other people fighting for education, healthcare, and a living wage as rights."

Hikind added that in addition to himself, “several others, including journalists" have been barred from viewing Ocasio-Cortez's tweets.

The Daily Caller said Ocasio-Cortez blocked them in May after the site contradicted Ocasio-Cortez's claims on the Green New Deal rollout. OANN's Liz Wheeler tweeted on July 5 that Ocasio-Cortez had blocked her, even though she was "respectful & civil."

And The Daily Wire's Ryan Saavedra wrote on April 5 that Ocasio-Cortez "finally blocked me and it was after I called out her latest set of lies."

Saavedra said he was blocked after writing on Twitter about a viral video of Ocasio-Cortez seemingly using an unusual manner of speech.

"Ocasio-Cortez speaks in an accent that she never uses while telling a room of predominately black people that there is nothing wrong with them folding clothes, cooking, and driving other people around on a bus for a living," Saavedra wrote.

Ocasio-Cortez responded that those "“talking about [her] voice can step right off” and claimed she used a similar manner of speech when discussing Brett Kavanaugh and talking at the Women's March. Saavedra was reportedly blocked after finding and posting videos of those speeches that he said contradicted Ocasio-Cortez's claims.

Hikind said he was seeking others to come forward.

"If you or anyone you know has been blocked by @AOC please get in touch with me ASAP!" Hikind wrote on Twitter Tuesday, suggesting he may want to speak to other potential co-plaintiffs or gather additional evidence.

In its decision, the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals noted that because Trump uses Twitter to communicate with the public about his administration, and because his account is open to the public for people to comment on his posts, it warrants constitutional free speech protection under the First Amendment, which prohibits government discrimination against a person’s free speech based on their viewpoint.

The appellate ruling specifically affirmed a lower court’s decision that declared the president’s account a “public forum" for First Amendment purposes.

“We do conclude," Judge Barrington D. Parker wrote for the majority, " ... 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.”

Parker added: “This debate, as uncomfortable and as unpleasant as it frequently may be, is nonetheless a good thing.

In resolving this appeal, we remind the litigants and the public that if the First Amendment means anything, it means that the best response to disfavored speech on matters of public concern is more speech, not less.”

The court rejected Trump's argument that he was using his Twitter account, which has more than 60 million followers and routinely discusses matters of policy, in a personal capacity.

“We conclude that the evidence of the official nature of the account is overwhelming," Parker said.

"We also conclude that once the president has chosen a platform and opened up its interactive space to millions of users and participants, he may not selectively exclude those whose views he disagrees with.”

According to court documents, Trump admitted that he blocked the case plaintiffs in 2017 after they posted tweets that “criticized him or his policies.” Once they were blocked, they were no longer able to view Trump’s tweets while logged in, nor were they able to reply to tweets or view comment threads on Trump’s Twitter page.

The court said that Trump’s account was indeed private before he became president, but that changed once he took office and used it for official business, as it now displays “all the trappings of an official, state‐run account.

" The court said that once Trump leaves office, his account will be considered private again.

The Justice Department, meanwhile, stands by Trump's position and indicated an appeal may be forthcoming.

"We are disappointed with the court’s decision and are exploring possible next steps," DOJ spokesperson Kelly Laco said in a statement. "As we argued, President Trump’s decision to block users from his personal twitter account does not violate the First Amendment.”

The opinion concluded by pointing out that in the current political climate, more debate is good, even if it can be “unpleasant” at times.

“The irony in all of this is that we write at a time in the history of this nation when the conduct of our government and its officials is subject to wide‐open, robust debate,” the court said.

“This debate encompasses an extraordinarily broad range of ideas and viewpoints and generates a level of passion and intensity the likes of which have rarely been seen.

 This debate, as uncomfortable and as unpleasant as it frequently may be, is nonetheless a good thing. In resolving this appeal, we remind the litigants and the public that if the First Amendment means anything, it means that the best response to disfavored speech on matters of public concern is more speech, not less.”

Fox News' Bill Mears contributed to this report.

https://www.blabber.buzz/conservative-news/611872-aoc-to-face-lawsuit-over-blocking-twitter-users-following-appeals-court-ruling-on-trump-special?utm_source=c-pm&utm_medium=c-pm-email&utm_term=c-pm-GI