Pressure builds on Facebook Oversight Board politi.co/3rHBi8T Scoop via @ZachMontellaro about our new letter supporting Facebook's decision to deplatform Trump.
Here's a link to our full letter on Facebook deplatforming Trump: politico.com/f/?id=00000177…
@davidakaye @julia_azari @JNelsonLDF @alexstamos @jacklerner @cailinmeister @NormOrnstein @Bertrall_Ross Jim Weatherall
Our letter about Facebook deplatforming Trump got more coverage @Politico here, noting 9,000 comments have been submitted so far on the question: politico.com/news/2021/02/1…
Trump Facebook ban draws flood of opinions as Oversight Board nears ruling over Capitol riot suspension usatoday.com/story/tech/202… via @usatoday Quoting our letter supporting the deplatforming of Trump

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Rick Hasen

Rick Hasen Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @rickhasen

19 Jan
Me @CNN Oct. 19: "What will the United States and the world wake up to on November 4, 2020, the day after Election Day? And could the US endure a close election in which Joe Biden is declared the winner but President Donald J. Trump refuses to concede?"
cnn.com/2020/10/19/opi…
"If the race is close, Trump and his campaign could file lawsuits and use evidence of election administrator incompetence to convince key segments of the American right that Democrats stole the election through deliberate fraud. ..."
"Trump has already sowed distrust in the results by saying without evidence that the only way he loses is if the election is 'rigged.' ..."
Read 5 tweets
12 Dec 20
The Supreme Court dismissed Texas’s bill of complaint in the latest high-profile case pushed by Trump allies in an attempt to overturn the results of the election. The Court did not issue an accompanying opinion.
As expected, Justices Alito and Thomas, who had previously stated that the Court does not have discretion to turn down the cases, would have granted the motion to file the complaint but not granted other relief and expressing no view on the merits of the case.
Read 16 tweets
4 Dec 20
When I was on @NewsHour on November 5, I said that Trump had no grand legal strategy to overturn the results of the election. Nothing has changed in a month, other than a streak of losing, poorly conceived and worse executed cases.
pbs.org/newshour/show/…
If anything, the lawsuits in the last weeks have gotten worse
Read 5 tweets
29 Nov 20
You've got to be kidding me.
At the appellate level and Supreme Court level, the appointing judge is the best predictor of how a judge/justice will vote in the highest profile cases.
Not because they are hacks, but because they were chosen for their genuinely held ideology.
I can predict with near certainty how almost every Supreme Court Justice will vote in nearly every election case. And my first rule of thumb is which President appointed the Justice.
*the appointing President
Read 13 tweets
25 Nov 20
#ELB: Donor Sues True the Vote Claiming He Gave $2.5 Million to Fund Jim Bopp Litigation to Expose Fraud in Battleground States to Help Trump, But the Group Withdrew Their Complaints and Did Nothing. He Wants a Refund. electionlawblog.org/?p=119080
The complaint alleges that True the Vote through Bopp finally agreed to give back only $1 million of the $2.5 million to fund absurd voter fraud litigation, in exchange for an agreement not to sue for the rest.
The complaint also alleges that True the Vote withdrew its four lawsuits filed by Bopp in consultation with the Trump campaign.
The reason for the withdrawal have not been made clear publicly.
Read 4 tweets
23 Nov 20
First thing to note about the Trump campaign brief in the 3rd Circuit: it throws Trump's prior counsel under the bus for "incorrectly omitt[ing] numerous allegations and counts"
Key point: the Trump brief says it is not trying to disenfranchise 6.8 million PA voters, "just" throw out about 70,000 votes. BUT it also asks ultimately for court to void election, and let PA legislature choose electors. That IS disenfranchising 6.8 million PA voters.
The brief is procedurally weird, asking casually for a preliminary injunction or temporary restraining order. Trump campaign should be asking for an injunction pending appeal if it wants preliminary relief. But it doesn't. It wants remand to reconsider proposed amended complaint
Read 10 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!