Trump is suing Google, Twitter and Facebook. The cases are 'DOA.'

The former president, who is still suspended from Facebook, Youtube and Twitter, has long tried to punish social media companies that he claims silence conservatives. It hasn't gone well.

A graphic of Donald Trump that appears ripped over his mouth, with text in French peeking through underneath.

Trump has unsuccessfully threatened social media and claimed it silences conservatives.

Image: Charles Deluvio / Protocol

Donald Trump announced Wednesday he'll sue Facebook, Twitter and Google for allegedly silencing him, even though the former president's previous attempts to punish social media have largely failed.

The lawsuits against the companies and CEOs Mark Zuckerberg, Jack Dorsey and Sundar Pichai come as Trump remains suspended from Facebook, Twitter and YouTube over his praise of supporters who perpetrated the deadly Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol.

"I stand before you this morning to announce a very important and very beautiful, I think, development for our freedom," said Trump, speaking on Wednesday alongside the leaders of the pro-Trump America First Policy Institute. Trump said he would be the lead plaintiff in a class action seeking an injunction, punitive damages and "prompt restitution" in federal court.

Get access to all the latest tech politics and policy coverage at Protocol | Policy.

Trump often asserts that companies cannot silence users for their political beliefs, and insists that the major social media sites are doing that to conservatives. But free speech rights in the U.S. only stop the government, not private companies, from shutting down people's views, and the social media sites, which have been key to the spread of Trump's movement, deny their content moderation is partisan. U.S. law also immunizes online firms from lawsuits over the third-party content they remove as a way to incentivize the takedown of violent, threatening and horrific content.

For that reason, experts say the suits are almost certainly destined for failure. "Trump's suit is DOA," said Paul Barrett, deputy director of the NYU Stern Center for Business and Human Rights said in a statement. "In fact, Facebook and Twitter themselves have a First Amendment free speech right to determine what speech their platforms project and amplify—and that right includes excluding speakers who incite violence, as Trump did in connection with the January 6 Capitol insurrection."

Yet Trump, who repeatedly violated the sites' user agreements, has insisted the companies must be punished for alleged misdeeds. During his presidency, he frequently pushed Republicans in Congress to repeal the websites' immunity under Sec. 230 of the Communications Decency Act, signed an order urging agencies to pare the protections, unsuccessfully vetoed the defense authorization because it didn't repeal the law and issued all manner of threats.

"We're going to hold big tech very accountable," said Trump, who routinely threatens lawsuits and gains publicity from the claims without following through on them. "This is the first of numerous other lawsuits, I assume, that would follow."

The suits aim to find a workaround to the fact that tech companies are private entities by framing them as extensions of Congress, arguing that pressure from congressional Democrats led them to make the content moderation decisions they made.

Talks in Congress regarding ripping out Sec. 230, which has detractors on both sides of the aisle, collapsed as it became clear that Republicans and Democrats wanted different things. President Joe Biden, nominally a critic of the law himself, revoked Trump's order.

"We're going to make sure that the liability protections that they have under Sec. 230 is, at a very minimum, changed and maybe at a maximum taken away," Tump claimed.

In his post-presidency, Trump also had a short-lived blog, and so far appears to have stayed off Gettr, the social media site from former top aide Jason Miller. Miller's site explicitly claimed rights to moderate content in its terms of service, in terms reminiscent of Sec. 230.

Plenty of Democrats have balked at the power of Big Tech companies, including their ability to squash speech, particularly internationally where countries use that power to shut up dissent. And it's certainly true that Trump has been booted, for now, from major platforms for his violations.

Yet the idea of suing the social media sites over alleged censorship is hardly new and is rarely successful. Plaintiffs with lower public profiles than Trump have insisted that sites like Facebook function so much like a government that they can't shut people down. Conservative Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has also floated regulating Facebook and Twitter as utilities that are so crucial to modern communications that they shouldn't be allowed to discriminate against customers. Even Republican Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis signed a law to use the power of the state to force companies to keep up content they would otherwise suppress.

During a speech reminiscent of his campaign rallies that touched on Trump's many political grievances and his handling of the coronavirus pandemic, Trump claimed on Wednesday that the companies had ceased being private entities.

Yet the Florida law was blocked last week, at least temporarily, and as recently as 2019, the Supreme Court said that free speech guarantees mean private companies can exercise control over the content they carry.


Supreme Court takes a sledgehammer to greenhouse gas regulations

The court ruled 6-3 that the EPA cannot use the Clean Air Act to regulate power plant greenhouse gas emissions. That leaves a patchwork of policies from states, utilities and, increasingly, tech companies to pick up the slack.

The Supreme Court struck a major blow to the federal government's ability to regulate greenhouse gases.

Eric Lee/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Striking down the right to abortion may be the Supreme Court's highest-profile decision this term. But on Wednesday, the court handed down an equally massive verdict on the federal government's ability to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. In the case of West Virginia v. EPA, the court decided that the agency has no ability to regulate greenhouse gas pollution under the Clean Air Act. Weakening the federal government's powers leaves a patchwork of states, utilities and, increasingly, tech companies to pick up the slack in reducing carbon pollution.

Keep Reading Show less
Brian Kahn

Brian ( @blkahn) is Protocol's climate editor. Previously, he was the managing editor and founding senior writer at Earther, Gizmodo's climate site, where he covered everything from the weather to Big Oil's influence on politics. He also reported for Climate Central and the Wall Street Journal. In the even more distant past, he led sleigh rides to visit a herd of 7,000 elk and boat tours on the deepest lake in the U.S.

Every day, millions of us press the “order” button on our favorite coffee store's mobile application: Our chosen brew will be on the counter when we arrive. It’s a personalized, seamless experience that we have all come to expect. What we don’t know is what’s happening behind the scenes. The mobile application is sourcing data from a database that stores information about each customer and what their favorite coffee drinks are. It is also leveraging event-streaming data in real time to ensure the ingredients for your personal coffee are in supply at your local store.

Applications like this power our daily lives, and if they can’t access massive amounts of data stored in a database as well as stream data “in motion” instantaneously, you — and millions of customers — won’t have these in-the-moment experiences.

Keep Reading Show less
Jennifer Goforth Gregory
Jennifer Goforth Gregory has worked in the B2B technology industry for over 20 years. As a freelance writer she writes for top technology brands, including IBM, HPE, Adobe, AT&T, Verizon, Epson, Oracle, Intel and Square. She specializes in a wide range of technology, such as AI, IoT, cloud, cybersecurity, and CX. Jennifer also wrote a bestselling book The Freelance Content Marketing Writer to help other writers launch a high earning freelance business.

Can crypto regulate itself? The Lummis-Gillibrand bill hopes so.

Creating the equivalent of the stock markets’ FINRA for crypto is the ideal, but experts doubt that it will be easy.

The idea of creating a government-sanctioned private regulatory association has been drawing more attention in the debate over how to rein in a fast-growing industry whose technological quirks have baffled policymakers.

Illustration: Christopher T. Fong/Protocol

Regulating crypto is complicated. That’s why Sens. Cynthia Lummis and Kirsten Gillibrand want to explore the creation of a private sector group to help federal regulators do their job.

The bipartisan bill introduced by Lummis and Gillibrand would require the CFTC and the SEC to work with the crypto industry to look into setting up a self-regulatory organization to “facilitate innovative, efficient and orderly markets for digital assets.”

Keep Reading Show less
Benjamin Pimentel

Benjamin Pimentel ( @benpimentel) covers crypto and fintech from San Francisco. He has reported on many of the biggest tech stories over the past 20 years for the San Francisco Chronicle, Dow Jones MarketWatch and Business Insider, from the dot-com crash, the rise of cloud computing, social networking and AI to the impact of the Great Recession and the COVID crisis on Silicon Valley and beyond. He can be reached at bpimentel@protocol.com or via Google Voice at (925) 307-9342.


Alperovitch: Cybersecurity defenders can’t be on high alert every day

With the continued threat of Russian cyber escalation, cybersecurity and geopolitics expert Dmitri Alperovitch says it’s not ideal for the U.S. to oscillate between moments of high alert and lesser states of cyber readiness.

Dmitri Alperovitch (the co-founder and former CTO of CrowdStrike) speaks at RSA Conference 2022.

Photo: RSA Conference

When it comes to cybersecurity vigilance, Dmitri Alperovitch wants to see more focus on resiliency of IT systems — and less on doing "surges" around particular dates or events.

For instance, whatever Russia is doing at the moment.

Keep Reading Show less
Kyle Alspach

Kyle Alspach ( @KyleAlspach) is a senior reporter at Protocol, focused on cybersecurity. He has covered the tech industry since 2010 for outlets including VentureBeat, CRN and the Boston Globe. He lives in Portland, Oregon, and can be reached at kalspach@protocol.com.


How the internet got privatized and how the government could fix it

Author Ben Tarnoff discusses municipal broadband, Web3 and why closing the “digital divide” isn’t enough.

The Biden administration’s Internet for All initiative, which kicked off in May, will roll out grant programs to expand and improve broadband infrastructure, teach digital skills and improve internet access for “everyone in America by the end of the decade.”

Decisions about who is eligible for these grants will be made based on the Federal Communications Commission’s broken, outdated and incorrect broadband maps — maps the FCC plans to update only after funding has been allocated. Inaccurate broadband maps are just one of many barriers to getting everyone in the country successfully online. Internet service providers that use government funds to connect rural and low-income areas have historically provided those regions with slow speeds and poor service, forcing community residents to find reliable internet outside of their homes.

Keep Reading Show less
Aditi Mukund
Aditi Mukund is Protocol’s Data Analyst. Prior to joining Protocol, she was an analyst at The Daily Beast and NPR where she wrangled data into actionable insights for editorial, audience, commerce, subscription, and product teams. She holds a B.S in Cognitive Science, Human Computer Interaction from The University of California, San Diego.
Latest Stories