Entertainment Appeals court upholds ruling Trump cannot block critics on Twitter
Trump abortion referral 'gag rule' can be enforced, U.S. appeals court says
Trump abortion referral 'gag rule' can be enforced, U.S. appeals court saysIn a 7-4 decision, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a ruling last June by a unanimous three-judge panel to lift injunctions won by California, Oregon and Washington against enforcing the rule, which deprives clinics of Title X family planning funds if they provide abortion referrals.
Video by GeoBeats
NEW YORK — The 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals upheld its decision Monday that President Donald Trump cannot block critics on Twitter, rejecting his long-shot bid to reargue the case.
Trump had asked for a nine-judge panel to reconsider the ruling. A majority rejected that bid.
Clarence Thomas laments ruling that let FCC kill net neutrality
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas doesn't have many fans among open internet advocates. His decision in the 2005 Brand X broadband case let the FCC classify internet service any way it liked as long as there was a justification, giving Ajit Pai's FCC the tools it needed to kill net neutrality. However, he appears to have had a change of heart. In the lone dissent on a case addressing the IRS' interpretation of American law, Thomas said he felt Brand X was "inconsistent" with the Constitution, the Administrative Procedure Act and other approaches to interpreting laws. He added that he would "revisit" his decision if he could.
Judge Barrington Parker, writing for the majority, said Trump’s use of Twitter was fundamental to his duties.
“Excluding people from an otherwise public forum such as this by blocking those who express views critical of a public official is, we concluded, unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination,” Parker wrote.
“Twitter is not just an official channel of communication for the President; it is his most important channel of communication.”
Two Trump-appointed judges, Richard Sullivan and Michael Park, dissented, writing that the president’s Twitter account did not constitute a public forum and that his use of it did not represent a “state action.”
They argued that important constitutional questions were unresolved.
Court won't let Trump pardon void guilty verdict against Arpaio
But sheriff's lawyers declare victory over ruling that criminal contempt finding has 'no legal consequences.'The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Thursday that Arpaio is not entitled to have the guilty verdict on a misdemeanor contempt-of-court charge vacated because it has no legal significance in the wake of Trump's pardon.
“It is not clear from the panel’s decision when President Trump’s Twitter activity crossed into state action,” Park wrote. “Did it happen on Inauguration Day? Upon a particular ‘official announcement’ from @realDonaldTrump? And how many ‘official’ tweets does it take to convert ‘personal’ tweets into state action? The panel decision raises difficult questions but provides little guidance for officials today or to litigants, lawyers, and judges tomorrow.”
The Knight First Amendment Institute, which brought the suit on behalf of seven Twitter users blocked by Trump, hailed the ruling.
Federal appeals court rules against Trump in two major immigration cases
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated a block of the administration’s policy forcing migrants seeking asylum in the U.S. to wait in Mexico while the cases play out.In a long-awaited decision, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 to reinstate a block on the policy forcing migrants seeking asylum in the U.S. to wait in Mexico while their cases play out. The court also ruled 3-0 to uphold a block on a rule seeking to bar asylum eligibility from migrants who cross the border between ports of entry.
“We’re pleased that the full appeals court will leave the panel’s original ruling in place,” said Jameel Jaffer, Knight Executive Director. “The ruling is an important affirmation of core First Amendment principles as applied to new communications technology.”
The 2nd Circuit rarely grants requests for “en banc” hearings before large panels of judges.
“When he receives responses from the public to the Account, and when he blocks responders whose views he disfavors, he remains the President,” Parker wrote for the majority. “The critical question in this case is not the nature of the Account when it was set up a decade ago. The critical question for First Amendment purposes is how the President uses the Account in his capacity as President.”
©2020 New York Daily News
Visit New York Daily News at
Trump will be the first president to participate in an anti-abortion march
The American president announced on Twitter that he will attend the "March for Life" on Friday 24 January. This anti-abortion event is held annually in the United States.
Donald Trump will participate in the "March for Life" on Friday January 24 in Washington. He will thus become the first American president to attend this annual event against the right to abortion.
"President Donald Trump will be the first president in history to go to the" March for Life "," the White House announced on its Twitter account on Wednesday.
This Friday, January 24, President @realDonaldTrump will be the first President in history to attend the March for Life!—WhiteHouse (@The White House)
"See you Friday," then tweeted the Republican billionaire, predicting a "large crowd," over a message calling for "March for life."
See you on Friday ... Big Crowd! https://t.co/MFyWLG4HFZ—realDonaldTrump (@Donald J. Trump)
In 2017, Mike Pence became the first vice president to attend this rally. As early as 2018, Donald Trump - who once spoke in favor of the right to abortion - spoke to the thousands of activists gathered in Washington. But he had hitherto done it through a giant screen interposed.A "lifelong advocate"
"We are deeply honored to welcome President Trump to the 47th" Walk for Life "," Walk Chair Jeanne Mancini said in a statement.
"From the appointment of pro-life judges [...] to the reduction of taxpayer funding for abortions at home and abroad, [passing by] the call to stop late abortions, President Trump and his administration have been constant defenders of life, ”said Jeanne Mancini.
This demonstration is generally organized around the anniversary date ofA judicial battle legalizing the voluntary termination of pregnancy (IVG) in the United States, January 22, 1973.
Since the election of Donald Trump, anti-abortion activists have been galvanized by thehired by the tenant of the White House, candidate for re-election in November, who appointed two judges opposed to abortion.
Several conservative states have thus adoptedlaws on abortion, and hope that the legal battle engaged will lead them , thus giving it the possibility of reversing this historic judgment .
The first litmus test will take place in March, when the Supreme Court examines a Louisiana restrictive law.
Judge puts hold on Democrats' suit for Trump's tax returns .
The judge cited uncertainties about how another court may act in a different case that raises similar issues.District Court Judge Trevor McFadden, in his order, cited uncertainties about how another court may act in a different case that raises issues similar to the ones in the suit for Trump’s returns. In that second case, House Judiciary Committee Democrats are appealing a ruling that former White House counsel Don McGahn can defy a congressional subpoena for his testimony.