By Jill Colvin

Former President Donald Trump has filed suit against three of the country's biggest tech companies, claiming he and other conservatives have been wrongfully censored.

Trump announced the action against Facebook, Twitter and Google's YouTube, along with the companies' CEOs, at a press conference in New Jersey on Wednesday. He was joined by other plaintiffs in the suits, which were filed in federal court in Miami.

“We’re demanding an end to the shadow-banning, a stop to the silencing and a stop to the blacklisting, banishing and canceling that you know so well,” he said.

Under Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act, social media platforms are allowed to moderate their services by removing posts that, for instance, are obscene or violate the services’ own standards, so long as they are acting in “good faith.” The law also generally exempts internet companies from liability for the material that users post.

But Trump and some other politicians have long argued that Twitter, Facebook and other social media platforms have abused that protection and should lose their immunity — or at least have to earn it by satisfying requirements set by the government.

Trump was suspended from Twitter, Facebook and YouTube after his followers stormed the Capitol building on Jan. 6. The companies cited concerns that he would incite further violence.

Nonetheless, Trump has continued to spread lies about the 2020 election, baselessly claiming that he won, even though state and local election officials, his own attorney general and numerous judges, including some he appointed, have said there is no evidence of the mass voter fraud he alleges.

Facebook, Google and Twitter all declined comment Wednesday.

The suits argue that banning or suspending Trump and the other plaintiffs is a violation of the First Amendment, despite the fact that the companies are private. The suit against Facebook and CEO Mark Zuckerberg says Facebook acted unconstitutionally when it removed Trump from the platform. Suits against Twitter and YouTube make similar claims. All three ask the court to award unspecified damages, declare Section 230 unconstitutional and restore Trump’s accounts, along with those of the other plaintiffs - a handful of others who have all had posts or accounts removed.

But Trump’s lawsuits are likely doomed to fail, said Eric Goldman, a law professor at Santa Clara University in California who has studied more than 60 similar, failed lawsuits over the past few decades that sought to take on internet companies for terminating or suspending users' accounts.

“They’ve argued everything under the sun, including First Amendment, and they get nowhere,” Goldman said. “Maybe he’s got a trick up his sleeve that will give him a leg up on the dozens of lawsuits before him. I doubt it.”

Goldman said it’s likely Trump is instead pursuing the suits to garner attention. As president, Trump last year signed an executive order challenging Section 230.

“It was always about sending a message to their base that they’re fighting on their behalf against the evil Silicon Valley tech giants," Goldman said.

Matt Schruers, the president of the Computer & Communications Industry Association, a tech industry trade group that includes Facebook, Twitter and Google, said internet companies have a right to enforce their terms of service.

“Frivolous class action litigation will not change the fact that users — even U.S. Presidents — have to abide by the rules they agreed to,” he said in a statement.

O’Brien reported from Providence, Rhode Island. Associated Press writer Mae Anderson contributed to this report from Nashville.

Updated on July 7, 2021, at 12:51 p.m. ET with the latest details.

Share:
More In Politics
The Affordable Care Act's 'Family Glitch,' Explained
Krutika Amin, associate director at the Kaiser Family Foundation for the Program on the Affordable Care Act, joins Cheddar Politics to discuss the Biden administration's plan to fix the so-called 'family glitch' in the Affordable Care Act preventing millions of Americans from accessing government-subsidized health plan.
House Votes to Hold Scavino, Navarro in Contempt
Abdallah Fayyad, opinion writer at the Boston Globe, joins Cheddar Politics to discuss the House's vote to hold former Trump aides Dan Scavino and Peter Navarro in contempt of Congress and send the recommendation to the Department of Justice. Fayyad also weighs in on the pressure facing Attorney General Merrick Garland to be more aggressive in prosecuting the January 6 case.
Biden Administration Extends Student Loan Pause to August
Those paying back federal student loans are getting a few extra months of relief. President Biden just announced another extension of the pandemic relief program allowing millions of borrowers to freeze their student loan payments. The pause began in March 2020 and it has been extended six times. Tomas Campos, co-founder and CEO of Spinwheel, joins Cheddar News to discuss.
Doctors, Medical Experts Divided on Second COVID-19 Booster
There has been notable disagreement in the medical community about a fourth COVID-19 vaccine dose. The FDA last week authorized a second booster dose for older and immunocompromised individuals, as some agency officials did not support the idea. The FDA made the decision without meeting with its advisory committee, as it had ahead of its recommendations on the previous COVID-19 vaccine doses. The CDC followed in the footsteps of the FDA and authorized a fourth dose as well. Reports say the agency also did not discuss the move with its own advisory team of vaccine experts. Now, a growing number of doctors are speaking out against the decisions - leaving people confused about whether they should get another vaccine dose. Dr. Julie Morita, a member of the CDC's advisory committee to the director, and the executive vice president of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, joins Cheddar News' Closing Bell to discuss.
Load More