Judge won’t find what AOC just did to a reporter funny at all. In fact, it’s been ruled illegal.

NEW YORK, NY - MARCH 03: US Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on stage during the 2019 Athena Film Festival closing night film, "Knock Down the House" at the Diana Center at Barnard College on March 3, 2019 in New York City. (Photo by Lars Niki/Getty Images for The Athena Film Festival)
(FILE PHOTO by Lars Niki/Getty Images for The Athena Film Festival)

On Friday socialist congressman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez reportedly Twitter-blocked Ryan Saavedra, a conservative reporter from The Daily Wire who’d been critical of the race-baiting stunt she’d pulled earlier that day at the Al Sharpton’s National Action Network’s annual convention.

But while Saavedra found it to be a laughing matter — and not unjustifiably so — some believe that AOC may have inadvertently just broken the law by violating a judicial precedent.

Which judicial precedent? The one that was set last year when New York-based U.S. District Court Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald ruled that President Donald Trump cannot lawfully block his critics from his personal @realDonaldTrump Twitter account.

“We hold that portions of the @realDonaldTrump account — the ‘interactive space’ where Twitter users may directly engage with the content of the President’s tweets — are properly analyzed under the ‘public forum‘ doctrines set forth by the Supreme Court, that such space is a designated public forum, and that the blocking of the plaintiffs based on their political speech constitutes viewpoint discrimination that violates the First Amendment,” her ruling read.

The precedent basically established “that social media accounts operated by a government official — even the president of the United States — constitutes a public forum,” according to Clay Calvert, a 1st Amendment expert who teaches at University of Florida College of Journalism and Communications.

But wait, isn’t young 29-year-old Ocasio-Cortez a government official, hmm? Why, yes she is!

Uh oh …

According to Saavedra, this is the Twitter thread he posted that “triggered” her:

In an attempt to excuse her widely condemned decision to don a southern drawl to pander to the predominantly black audience at NAN’s annual convention, she falsely claimed she’d used the same accent during two previous speaking events. But that’d been a lie.

And when Saavedra called her out for her lie, she got “triggered” and blocked him. Triggered or not, she technically doesn’t have the right to block Saavedra or any other critic. And this isn’t just some “right-wing” talking point. It’s a judicial precedent set because of left-wing activism, ironically enough.

It was left-wing activists — one of whom is an avid fan of AOC — who sued the president in 2017 via the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University and wound up winning a year later.

Tweets from the aforementioned AOC-supporting activist may be seen below:

HERE’S WHAT YOU’RE MISSING …

It’s unclear how Rebecca Buckwalter, a writer and political consultant who was reportedly blocked by the president after she tweeted to him that he didn’t win the 2016 presidential election — “Russia won it for you” — feels about the fact that her beloved AOC may be held to the same standard that she and her cohorts introduced, and that’s since been reaffirmed by the 4th Circuit.

“A federal appeals court said on Monday a Virginia politician violated the Constitution by temporarily blocking a critic from her Facebook page, a decision that could affect President Donald Trump’s appeal from a similar ruling in New York,” Reuters reported in January.

“In a 3-0 decision, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said Phyllis Randall, chair of the Loudoun County Board of Supervisors, violated the First Amendment free speech rights of Brian Davison by banning him for 12 hours from her ‘Chair Phyllis J. Randall’ page.”

Sorry, AOC, but the law is the law, and it looks like you just broke it. Whoops!

PS: LOCK HER UP!

HERE’S WHAT YOU’RE MISSING …

Comments

Latest Articles