Post #56878 by wzambon on the US Policy board

Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy

Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (1)

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!

No. of Recommendations: 6

CNN reports Supreme Court brushes aside Laura Loomer lawsuit against social media companies
The Supreme Court declined Monday to take up an appeal from Laura Loomer, the prominent far-right influencer and ally of President Donald Trump who sued social media companies for yanking her off their platforms.
Loomer, who had previously sued X and Facebook-owner Meta Platforms, filed a new lawsuit alleging the companies violated civil racketeering laws by deplatforming her as she ran for Congress in Florida in 2020 and 2022.
Among other things, her appeal raised legal questions about the scope of a law known as Section 230 that immunizes social media sites from lawsuits involving content moderation. That immunity has been widely criticized on both the left and the right for different reasons, though the high court has largely avoided delving into the issue.
Loomer told the Supreme Court in written arguments that the decisions to remove her from the platforms “stifled” her ability to “communicate with voters, raise funds, and compete in federal elections.”
“Social media is critical to campaigns, especially during COVID-19 restrictions that limited traditional campaigning methods like door-to-door canvassing and public events,” her attorneys told the Supreme Court in her appeal. “Loomer had no social media for any of her campaigns due to social media bans.”
But Loomer repeatedly lost in lower courts. Both X and Meta waived their right to respond to her appeal at the Supreme Court – a sign that the companies did not take it seriously – and the court declined to hear the appeal even though it was not briefed.

Mike Shedock comments:
Correct Ruling
Laura Loomer has no “right” to an account on Facebook or X. Thus, her lawsuit was idiotic on constitutional grounds.
If Elon Musk removed my X account I would be very pissed off, but I would not complain about my Constitutional rights being violated.
None of Loomer’s complaints have anything to do with freedom of speech

https://mishtalk.com/economics/supreme-court-rejec...

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!

Print the post

Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (1)

Prev | Next

Announcements

US Policy FAQ

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

A community forum supporting civilized, and highly helpful, self-educating investors that come together for Shrewdness and merry spirits. These message boards closely follow the look and feel of the old message boards at boards.fool.com prior to the boards redirected to discussion.fool.com. Shrewd'm is not affiliated with the comprehensive and excellent investment website, The Motley Fool (TMF), in any way. The Shrewd commmunity here has owed, and continues to owe, gratitude to The Motley Fool for nurturing a culture of jovial irreverence towards Wall St, and that tradition will continue here.