Skip to main content

Twitter stalking is protected free speech, judge rules

twitter-bad

A San Francisco judge has declared that cyberstalking on Twitter and blogs is constitutionally-protected free speech, reports The New York Times. The ruling is a victory for the First Amendment. But like all things worth fighting for, it comes at a price.

Here’s what happened: A Buddhist religious leader in Maryland named Alyce Zeoli became friends with a man named William Lawrence Cassidy. At some point, the two had a falling out. Cassidy took the mature route, and began posting thousands of messages on blogs and Twitter, often using pseudonyms, that aggressively disparaged Zeoli. Some of them even called for her death.

Related Videos

Understandably distraught, Zeoli then worked with the FBI to have Cassidy arrested, which he was, based on interstate stalking laws. Cassidy, the government argued, had caused Zeoli “substantial emotional distress.”

This, however, was not enough to convince Judge Roger W. Titus, who declared that Cassidy’s actions, while distasteful, were not enough to set a precedent that could cause serious harm to the entire foundations of speech on the Internet.

“While Mr. Cassidy’s speech may have inflicted substantial emotional distress, the government’s indictment here is directed squarely at protected speech: anonymous, uncomfortable Internet speech addressing religious matters,” wrote Judge Titus, in his official order.

Titus ruled that, because no one was forced to read Cassidy’s posts and tweets — as opposed to a “telephone call, letter or email specifically addressed to and directed at another person” — they are considered free speech, not harassment, just as personal bulletin boards of the colonial era fell under the protection of the First Amendment, which “protects speech even when the subject or the manner of expression is uncomfortable and challenges conventional religious beliefs, political attitudes or standards of good taste.”

One of Zeoli’s lawyers, Shanlon Wu, told the Times that Zeoli was “appalled and frightened by the judge’s ruling.” It is not yet clear whether there will be an appeal to the ruling.

Editors' Recommendations

Twitter will now label, hide tweets when Trump, other politicians break its rules
Hand holding a Twitter phone

Twitter announced Thursday that it will add a notice over politicians' tweets if the social network deems the tweet to violate its rules. The new system is effective immediately.

“In the past, we’ve allowed certain tweets that violated our rules to remain on Twitter because they were in the public’s interest, but it wasn’t clear when and how we made those determinations,” the company said in the blog post. “To fix that, we’re introducing a new notice that will provide additional clarity in these situations, and sharing more on when and why we’ll use it.”

Read more
Twitter suffers privacy scare as bug reveals tweets of protected accounts
twitter now lets you block trolls

If you use Twitter on an Android device and have your tweets set to private, you'd better check that the setting is still activated.

Twitter said on Thursday, January 17 that it recently fixed a four-year-old bug that exposed the protected tweets of some Android users. People using Twitter on iOS devices or the web were not impacted.

Read more
Judge rules it’s unconstitutional for Trump to block critics on Twitter
How to Watch Trump State of the Union

In a decision in a federal court in New York, U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald ruled that President Trump may not block critics on Twitter for not sharing his political views. Doing so violates the First Amendment, the judge ruled.

“While we must recognize, and are sensitive to, the president’s personal First Amendment rights, he cannot exercise those rights in a way that infringes the corresponding First Amendment rights of those who have criticized him,” the judge said. The lawsuit was filed by Columbia University's Knight Amendment Institute and seven Twitter users whom Trump blocked.

Read more