You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Bounty: What happened with trump and twitter

in #twitterlast year

In general, Trump has been on to say that the social media site try and censor voices on the right. He has been mad at them and one of the things he has threatened them with is removing the protections they have from getting sued over those maters. As it stands today if I was on twitter and they ban me I can't do much of anything.

So after Twitter put a fact check on one of his tweets he has now started movements to do what he said. Trump feels that the fact that they put these fact checks on this tweets and not others is just more proof that Twitter and other platforms target conservatives. So he is trying to take away the part of the communications act of 230 that has prevented conservative voice who has been banned from suing in court.

In reality, his order is going to get caught up in court. I am not sure if he can do what he trying or not. While it is in place you might see some people try to sue Twitter. You also could see Twitter back off and stop doing the fact checks and bans. I don't really see that happening but possible.

Really he will set up the legal battle wither or not private companies like Twitter can control their platforms as they want. Or if the federal government is going to step in and say that you can't block users. Or you can't put in real-time fact checks. Which other limits they would want to put on them.

Sort:  

Trump needs help of congress to change laws... Congress can't overturn executive orders of previous presidents, only current president can, and president can't change laws.

Yes in the theory that true. Yet Obama also tried to pass laws with EX. Orders and his are still in the courts. So while they are not supposed to make laws. They make "rules" so he can try to say that that now people can sue social media sites for blocking their free speech. And it then become up to courts to allow that order.

Presidents and other state leaders can always try to bend rules but that's just politics, it has no legal ground. In some countries president only has ceremonial status and can't do any real work. President is just kind of single face that represents the country abroad along with foreign minister who represents the government.

Ya doesn't quite work like that. DACA is a big example. That Presidental Order is blocking a lot of people from getting deported.

Mind you not taking a stance on DACA here just pointing out that the orders have in the past overwritten other laws. It has to do with the power of the president's office. He has a lot of power in the constitution. I still don't know how this will go but I don't think it is clear cut.

Executive orders should not overwrite laws, they can just modify how existing laws should be interpreted if there is a conflict between two laws, or a law and international treaty. Like I said earlier this week, president has authority that others need to respect even if president does something they don't agree with.

In many countries president has right to pardon convicted criminals. As illegal entry to a country is a crime, president has right to block deportation.

Executive orders are in effect until expired (by current president or because of explicit expiration date) or declared against law.