“With Truth API, Donald Trump is now SELLING ‘early’ information to those businesses willing to pay $100,000 per month for it. Surely that is illegal and should be stopped?” – Vivian
Hi Vivian,
There’s an active lawsuit trying to stop it.
The Freedom of the Press Foundation and The Intercept filed a complaint against the president, along with two of his aides — Natalie Harp and Dan Scavino, who have access to, and publish, Truth Social posts on his behalf — and the Executive Office of the President and the White House Office, which employ those aides.
“President Donald Trump is charging $100,000 per month for advance access to his official government announcements on Truth Social, the social media platform he owns,” the plaintiffs said in their federal complaint, filed in New York.
“This scheme is extraordinary, corrupt, and unconstitutional, and Plaintiffs bring this case to stop it,” they added, arguing that it violates the First and Fifth amendments to the Constitution.
Their First Amendment claim is that the venture burdens their right to equally access the president’s public comments, and that there is no legitimate interest in the president profiting from selling government information. The plaintiffs’ Fifth Amendment claim is that they have a right to not be charged “unreasonable sums” for official data in the “out-and-out plan of extortion embodied by Truth API.”
The case is in its early stages, and the government defendants will have a chance to present their position before a judge decides how to proceed.
While that uncertain court process unfolds, Democrats have spoken out against the plain corruption that the suit spotlights. But Republicans currently control Congress, so the gambit marks the latest instance of Trump standing to profit from the presidency without having to worry about impeachment. Likewise, we would not expect entities in the Trump-controlled government to act against the president, whether civilly or criminally. And that’s before even getting into how the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling could shield him.
So as we track the New York case, the results of the November midterms could also play a role in moderating the president’s behavior (or not) going forward.
Please submit “Ask Jordan” questions through this form for a chance to have your question featured in a future edition of the Deadline: Legal newsletter.
The post Ask Jordan: Is it legal for the president to sell early access to his social media posts? appeared first on MS NOW.
