Media Groups Sue Trump Over Paid API Access to President's Posts
Juste les faits

Media Groups Sue Trump Over Paid API Access to President's Posts

Résumé

The Intercept and the Freedom of the Press Foundation filed a federal lawsuit alleging that Trump Media's paid API for real-time Truth Social posts violates First and Fifth Amendment rights.

A federal lawsuit filed Wednesday by The Intercept and the Freedom of the Press Foundation accuses President Donald Trump and his White House social-media team of violating constitutional rights by restricting access to his Truth Social posts. The plaintiffs argue that Trump Media’s newly launched API, which offers subscribers real-time access to the president’s posts for fees ranging from $60,000 to $100,000 a month, creates an unlawful distinction between paying customers and the public.

Nikhel Sus, chief counsel for Citizens for Responsibility & Ethics in Washington, said any delay, even milliseconds, constitutes a First Amendment violation because there is no de minimis exception for restrictions on fundamental speech rights. > “There’s no de minimis exception for restrictions on fundamental First Amendment rights,” Sus told CNN.

Katie Fallow, deputy litigation director at the Knight First Amendment Institute, added that the government lacks a legitimate interest in limiting access, noting that any interest belongs to Trump and his company, not to the state. > “There’s no legitimate government interest in doing this,” Fallow said.

The complaint also asserts that the selective, paid access may breach the Fifth Amendment’s due-process and equal-protection guarantees, as it treats the president’s official statements—public information under the Presidential Records Act—as private data subject to purchase. Law professor RonNell Andersen Jones said the case could clarify the public’s constitutional right to receive information, not just to speak.

Senators Elizabeth Warren and Adam Schiff have previously urged regulators to examine the legality of the Truth API, describing the arrangement as an “abuse of the office of the President” and requesting an SEC review for potential securities-law violations.

The White House has not responded to requests for comment.

Source

CNN

Continuez à lire — gratuitement

Créez un compte gratuit pour suivre l'actualité. Aucune carte requise.