Among those is Parler, a new social media site that touts its lack of censorship. Since its inception, the site has attracted several Trump supporters, conspiracy theorists and conservatives.
Although President Trump hasn’t been removed from Parler, app stores like Apple and Google removed the platform citing posts encouraging violence and false claims.
Since then, the president has floated the idea of creating his own social media platform for supporters. It’s not clear whether he’ll do this or how long it may take.
This comes after violent protests erupted in Washington, D.C., on Wednesday outside the Capitol as Congress convened to certify the Electoral College vote. While the president was not physically present, he posted from his Twitter account — prompting criticism that he was “inciting violence.”
After sites like Facebook and Twitter removed the president from their sites, the question remains: Can he really be banned forever?
Can Twitter legally remove President Trump forever?
While most social media sites, like Facebook and Instagram, only suspended the president’s accounts until Inauguration Day (Jan. 20), Twitter took the unusual step to have its ban last “permanently.”
It’s unclear how long this ban would last and if it’s even legal for a social media site to do so.
“There’s an underlying question whether the First Amendment applies,” said ABC News Legal Analyst Royal Oakes. “Let’s assume for the moment that Twitter has a limited right to suspend of ban people. […] For them to say he is gone ‘permanently,’ I think allows people to criticize and say that really went over the line. On the other hand, there is a legitimate debate as to whether it was incitement of riot.”
Several supporters have taken to social media to argue Twitter violated the First Amendment by banning President Trump. However, the First Amendment only protects against the government restricting free speech — so it’s unclear whether the social media site is in violation.
“That’s in flux,” Oakes said. “As a result, everything is murky. Does the First Amendment apply? Was this going over the top?”
It’s a longstanding debate. Experts have argued for years whether social media sites have the right to ban people or groups, arguing it’s unlawful censorship.
Oakes said it would make more sense if Twitter opted for a temporary ban like its social media counterparts. But with a “permanent” suspension, it’s unclear whether the president will get to sign back onto his Twitter account.
Listen to the full interview with Royal Oakes:
Today’s Top Stories
- Storm clean up efforts from wind damage is bringing communities together
- Utah agriculture and food: cook any seeds you receive from China
- Boris Johnson promises UK will provide Hong Kongers path to citizenship after national…
- One dead, five hurt in head-on crash at Bonneville Salt Flats
- Tulsi Gabbard files lawsuit against Hillary Clinton for defamation
- Knolls Fire Update: Evacuation order lifted but still possible, only 25% contained
- Evacuations force California man to cancel SLC trip
- Provo High School football game moves back home, frustrating educators
- NFL wades back into controversy with new Super Bowl police shooting ad
- Utah a good home for autonomous drone development, military one reason