 Federal Court Rules Against Trump’s Unpresidential Twitter Behavior (DETAILS)One of the things that has plagued America   besides Donald Trump himself   is the POTUS  Twitter usage. Every day, Trump s Twitter account serves as an endless amount of humiliation and chaos for a country that was once well-respected around the world. While Trump has proven to his staff (and the country) that he cannot be controlled on social media, a federal court may have just ruled that there are some things he just CANNOT do on Twitter.One of Trump s most disturbing behaviors lies in his tendency to block people on Twitter just because they disagree with him. Currently, Trump is being sued by the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University for blocking people just because they expressed criticism. Thanks to a federal court ruling that happened this week, Trump may not be able to do that anymore.This week, a federal court ruled on a case very similar to Trump s, in which the chair of the Loudoun County Board of Supervisors, Phyllis J. Randall, had been blocking constituents on her public Facebook page. In the case Davison v. Loudoun County Board of Supervisors, Randall wrote on her county Facebook page, I really want to hear from ANY Loudoun citizen on ANY issues, request, criticism, compliment, or just your thoughts.  When Brian C. Davidson took her up on her offer, bringing up the alleged corruption in the county s school board, Randall responded by deleting his comment and blocking him. The following morning, Randall unblocked Davidson but he was not able to comment on her page or send her messages. Davidson argued that this was a violation of his freedom of speech, and a federal court ruled in his favor.U.S. District Judge James C. Cacheris ruled that this was a violation of the First Amendment s Free Speech Clause because Randall was  offended by his criticism of her colleagues in the County government , which he regarded as unconstitutional  viewpoint discrimination    pretty much what Trump does on Twitter. Cacheris explained:Defendant s offense at Plaintiff s views was therefore an illegitimate basis for her actions particularly given that Plaintiff earned Defendant s ire by criticizing the County government. Indeed, the suppression of critical commentary regarding elected officials is the quintessential form of viewpoint discrimination against which the First Amendment guards. By prohibiting Plaintiff from participating in her online forum because she took offense at his claim that her colleagues in the County government had acted unethically, Defendant committed a cardinal sin under the First Amendment.This certainly has implications to what might happen with Trump s own Twitter account. While Trump might try to argue that his personal Twitter page   separate from the @POTUS presidential account   is not intended to function as a public forum, it s obvious that Trump uses it to make presidential announcements. Members of his own team, such as former White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer, have even stated that Trump s tweets are  official statements    which means this account should be subjected to the same rules as Randall s public Facebook page was.Featured image via Steve Pope / Getty ImagesNews
federal court rules against trump presidential twitter behavior details one things plagued america besides donald trump pots twitter usage every day trump twitter account serves endless amount humiliation chaos country around world while trump proven staff country controlled social media federal court may ruled things can not trump disturbing behaviors lies tendency block people twitter disagree currently trump sued knight first amendment institute columbia university blocking people expressed criticism thanks federal court ruling happened week trump may able week federal court ruled case similar trump chair london county board supervisors phillips randall blocking constituents public facebook page in case davidson london county board supervisors randall wrote county facebook page i really want hear any london citizen any issues request criticism compliment thoughts when brian davidson took offer bringing alleged corruption county school board randall responded deleting comment blocking the following morning randall unblocked davidson able comment page send messages davidson argued violation freedom speech federal court ruled district judge james catchers ruled violation first amendment free speech clause randall offended criticism colleagues county government regarded unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination pretty much trump twitter catchers explained defendant offense plaintiff views therefore illegitimate basis actions particularly given plaintiff earned defendant ire criticizing county government indeed suppression critical commentary regarding elected officials quintessential form viewpoint discrimination first amendment guards by prohibiting plaintiff participating online forum took offense claim colleagues county government acted unethical defendant committed cardinal sin first certainly implications might happen trump twitter account while trump might try argue personal twitter page separate pots presidential account intended function public forum obvious trump uses make presidential announcements members team former white house press secretary sean spider even stated trump tweets official statements means account subjected rules randall public facebook page image via steve pope petty imagenes
Your task is to classify the provided input as real or fake news. Label 0 is meant for fake news, Label 1 is for real news. TEXT:  Federal Court Rules Against Trump’s Unpresidential Twitter Behavior (DETAILS)One of the things that has plagued America   besides Donald Trump himself   is the POTUS  Twitter usage. Every day, Trump s Twitter account serves as an endless amount of humiliation and chaos for a country that was once well-respected around the world. While Trump has proven to his staff (and the country) that he cannot be controlled on social media, a federal court may have just ruled that there are some things he just CANNOT do on Twitter.One of Trump s most disturbing behaviors lies in his tendency to block people on Twitter just because they disagree with him. Currently, Trump is being sued by the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University for blocking people just because they expressed criticism. Thanks to a federal court ruling that happened this week, Trump may not be able to do that anymore.This week, a federal court ruled on a case very similar to Trump s, in which the chair of the Loudoun County Board of Supervisors, Phyllis J. Randall, had been blocking constituents on her public Facebook page. In the case Davison v. Loudoun County Board of Supervisors, Randall wrote on her county Facebook page, I really want to hear from ANY Loudoun citizen on ANY issues, request, criticism, compliment, or just your thoughts.  When Brian C. Davidson took her up on her offer, bringing up the alleged corruption in the county s school board, Randall responded by deleting his comment and blocking him. The following morning, Randall unblocked Davidson but he was not able to comment on her page or send her messages. Davidson argued that this was a violation of his freedom of speech, and a federal court ruled in his favor.U.S. District Judge James C. Cacheris ruled that this was a violation of the First Amendment s Free Speech Clause because Randall was  offended by his criticism of her colleagues in the County government , which he regarded as unconstitutional  viewpoint discrimination    pretty much what Trump does on Twitter. Cacheris explained:Defendant s offense at Plaintiff s views was therefore an illegitimate basis for her actions particularly given that Plaintiff earned Defendant s ire by criticizing the County government. Indeed, the suppression of critical commentary regarding elected officials is the quintessential form of viewpoint discrimination against which the First Amendment guards. By prohibiting Plaintiff from participating in her online forum because she took offense at his claim that her colleagues in the County government had acted unethically, Defendant committed a cardinal sin under the First Amendment.This certainly has implications to what might happen with Trump s own Twitter account. While Trump might try to argue that his personal Twitter page   separate from the @POTUS presidential account   is not intended to function as a public forum, it s obvious that Trump uses it to make presidential announcements. Members of his own team, such as former White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer, have even stated that Trump s tweets are  official statements    which means this account should be subjected to the same rules as Randall s public Facebook page was.Featured image via Steve Pope / Getty ImagesNews
Your task is to classify the provided input as real or fake news. Label 0 is meant for fake news, Label 1 is for real news. TEXT: federal court rules against trump presidential twitter behavior details one things plagued america besides donald trump pots twitter usage every day trump twitter account serves endless amount humiliation chaos country around world while trump proven staff country controlled social media federal court may ruled things can not trump disturbing behaviors lies tendency block people twitter disagree currently trump sued knight first amendment institute columbia university blocking people expressed criticism thanks federal court ruling happened week trump may able week federal court ruled case similar trump chair london county board supervisors phillips randall blocking constituents public facebook page in case davidson london county board supervisors randall wrote county facebook page i really want hear any london citizen any issues request criticism compliment thoughts when brian davidson took offer bringing alleged corruption county school board randall responded deleting comment blocking the following morning randall unblocked davidson able comment page send messages davidson argued violation freedom speech federal court ruled district judge james catchers ruled violation first amendment free speech clause randall offended criticism colleagues county government regarded unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination pretty much trump twitter catchers explained defendant offense plaintiff views therefore illegitimate basis actions particularly given plaintiff earned defendant ire criticizing county government indeed suppression critical commentary regarding elected officials quintessential form viewpoint discrimination first amendment guards by prohibiting plaintiff participating online forum took offense claim colleagues county government acted unethical defendant committed cardinal sin first certainly implications might happen trump twitter account while trump might try argue personal twitter page separate pots presidential account intended function public forum obvious trump uses make presidential announcements members team former white house press secretary sean spider even stated trump tweets official statements means account subjected rules randall public facebook page image via steve pope petty imagenes