Trigger Warning: Before you get to the screen at the ACLU website where the statement linked below can be found, you have to first pass through this screen.
Elon Musk said he will restore Trump’s twitter account if his purchase goes through.
Musk told the Financial Times that the ban “was morally wrong and flat out stupid,” though Trump has publicly said he would not return to the social media platform and will instead use his own platform, Truth Social.
While it’s unclear what morality has to do with it, reversing Trump’s “permanent” ban would both be within his authority as owner and consistent with the principles of free speech Musk somewhat espouses. Whether Trump chooses to avail himself of a restored twitter account is entirely irrelevant. He will have the opportunity, which is all Musk can give.
ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero decided that this was an issue upon which he felt compelled to opine.
“You’d be hard-pressed to find a more steadfast opponent of Trump and his policies than the ACLU, but Elon Musk’s decision to re-platform President Trump is the right call. When a handful of individuals possess so much power over the most important forums for political speech, they should exercise that power with restraint. If Trump violates the platform rules again, Twitter should first employ lesser penalties like removing the offending post — rather than banning a political figure.
“Like it or not, President Trump is one of the most important political figures in this country, and the public has a strong interest in hearing his speech. Indeed, some of Trump’s most offensive tweets ended up being critical evidence in lawsuits filed against him and his administration. And we should know — we filed over 400 legal actions against him.”
What’s curious about Romero’s press release is that the concern when Trump was initially banned wasn’t about its impact on free speech in general, or political speech in particular. It was that if social media could ban a president, they could ban marginalized voices.
“President Trump can turn his press team or Fox News to communicate with the public, but others – like many Black, Brown, and LGTBQ activists who have been censored by social media companies – will not have that luxury. It is our hope that these companies will apply their rules transparently to everyone.
Romero’s position has now shifted from concern for the powerless to the value of political speech, even that of Trump, in the public sphere. Indeed, calling Trump “one of the most important political figures in this country” is quite surprising coming from Romero and the ACLU. Not that it isn’t a fair statement, but that it’s not quite the characterization one would expect.
Has the ACLU gained a newfound respect for free speech, even if it’s speech they find repugnant, speech that conflicts with the interests of their woke supporters?
Yes, hate speech is generally protected by the Constitution, but so is equality, and hate speech can often make a mockery of equal rights. What the critics call an abandonment of A.C.L.U.’s principles reflects, in fact, a growing awareness of many within the A.C.L.U. that speech and equality are sometimes in conflict, and that context matters.
Is the ACLU now walking back its position that Trump, political figure notwithstanding, should have the right to speak because, right or wrong, that’s the nature of free speech? Or is it that the worst condemnations of Trump tended to come from his own hand as he spewed his vulgar idiocy publicly? One thing is for certain: hatred of Trump brought in donations, and nothing motivates donations like an enemy that all its supporters can hate with a burning passion.
No comments:
Post a Comment