Should Trump be banned from Facebook, Twitter?

“Not freedom for the thought of those who agree with us, but freedom for the thought that we hate.”

 

This profound observation on free speech by the great American jurist Oliver Wendell Holmes has exceptions, which Holmes made clear in another First Amendment decision by noting that “speech that is false and dangerous is not protected” and no one is permitted  the freedom of “shouting ‘fire’ in a crowded theater, causing panic.” 

The Holmes remarks came to mind when pondering the decision by Facebook and Twitter to ban former president Trump indefinitely after he inspired a crowd to storm the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6.

Holmes’s words on the thoughts we hate are from a dissenting opinion in a 1929 Supreme Court  decision that blocked the citizenship application of a Hungarian immigrant named Rosika Schwimmer.

Schwimmer, in applying for the application, revealed that as a pacifist, she would not be willing to take up arms in defense of the United States. Even though Americans then, as now, had the right to conscientiously object to military service, the majority ruled that Schwimmer did not enjoy a citizen’s rights. 

Over the years, Holmes’s ideas  about limits on free speech had evolved. In 1919. he was part of a unanimous Court finding that the distribution of anti-draft leaflets  represented a clear and present danger to government recruitment in wartime.  He even likened the leafleting to falsely shouting fire in a theater.

But when wartime fever subsided, Holmes had second thoughts and in another leaflets case aimed at Russian immigrants supporting the Bolshevik Revolution.  “A silly leaflet by unknown men,” he wrote, was not a clear and present danger to the nation and “should not be illegal.” 

So how does all of this judicial thinking apply to the facts surrounding former president Trump’s loss of the use of Facebook  and Twitter because of the role his words played in inciting  the Jan.6 insurrection?

This final act of Trump’s tumultuous presidency resulted in death and destruction when his supporters attacked the Capitol while Congress was counting the 2020 electoral votes.  It was surely akin to falsely shouting fire in a crowded theater and was both dangerous and false.  And it was definitely not a silly speech by an unknown person. 

But Facebook is a private company and such organizations are not subject to the First Amendment. However, that doesn’t mean the  ban was fair and proper and Facebook had an independent committee of notables conduct an inquiry into its actions against Trump.

Former federal judge Michael McConnell, the co-chairman of that independent  committee, has pointed out there was no violation of the First Amendment because private companies can, indeed, violate the amendment.  Facebook and other social media can block whatever it deems unsuitable for whatever reason. However, they do so at the risk of offending public opinion, also known as their customers. Not to mention the trust busters in Congress, who can and do make laws upholding freedom of speech.

The committee  also noted Facebook doesn’t treat all of its users equally and needs to take a hard look at its standards before it finds Congress taking a hard look at its anti-trust status.  It criticized Trump’s ban and asked Facebook to reconsider.

What could amount to a lifetime ban on a former president, no matter how disreputable his conduct, is troubling.  This is especially true in Trump’s case if he follows through on his threat to run again in 2024. Every candidate should enjoy equal opportunity to reach voters.

And even though the First Amendment doesn’t apply here, our collective consciences should not ignore Holmes’s admonition about the truth we agree with and the truth we hate.

While writing this coIumn, I came upon another memorable admonition that has haunted me since I first read it as a student. It was made in 1930s by the great German theologian Martin Neimoller:

“First they came for the socialists but I did not speak out because I was not a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists but I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews but I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak for me.”

And I thought maybe it was time to speak out, even for Donald Trump.

 

Simsbury resident Dick Ahles is a retired journalist. Email him at rahles1@outlook.com.

The views expressed here are not necessarily those of The Millerton News and The News does not support or oppose candidates for public office.

Latest News

Millerton’s 175th committee advances plans for celebration, seeks vendors and sponsors

The Millerton 175th anniversary committee's tent during the village's trunk-or-treat event on Oct. 31, 2025.

Photo provided

MILLERTON — As Millerton officially enters its 175th year, the volunteer committee tasked with planning its milestone celebration is advancing plans and firming up its week-long schedule of events, which will include a large community fair at Eddie Collins Memorial Park and a drone light show. The events will take place this July 11 through 19.

Millerton’s 175th committee chair Lisa Hermann said she is excited for this next phase of planning.

Keep ReadingShow less
Why the focus on Greenland?

As I noted here in an article last spring entitled “Hands off Greenland”, the world’s largest island was at the center of a developing controversy. President Trump was telling all who would listen that, for national security reasons, the United States needed to take over Greenland, amicably if possible or by force if necessary. While many were shocked by Trump’s imperialistic statements, most people, at least in this country, took his words as ill-considered bluster. But he kept telling questioners that he had to have Greenland (oftenechoing the former King of France, Louis XIV who famously said, “L’État c’est moi!”.

Since 1951, the U.S. has had a security agreement with Denmark giving it near total freedom to install and operate whatever military facilities it wanted on Greenland. At one point there were sixteen small bases across the island, now there’s only one. Denmark’s Prime Minister has told President Trump that the U.S. should feel free to expand its installations if needed. As climate change is starting to allow a future passage from thePacific Ocean to the Arctic, many countries are showing interest in Greenland including Russia and China but this hardly indicates an international crisis as Trump and his subordinates insist.

Keep ReadingShow less
Military hardware as a signpost

It is hard not to equate military spending and purchasing with diplomatic or strategic plans being made, for reasons otherwise unknown. Keeping an eye out for the physical stuff can often begin to shine a light on what’s coming – good and possibly very bad.

Without Congressional specific approval, the Pentagon has awarded a contract to Boeing for $8,600,000,000 (US taxpayer dollars) for another 25 F-15A attack fighters to be given to Israel. Oh, and there’s another 25 more of the F-15EX variant on option, free to Israel as well.

Keep ReadingShow less
Truth and evidence depend on the right to observe

A small group of protesters voice opposition to President Trump's administration and Immigration and Customs Enforcement at Amenia's Fountain Square at the intersection of Route 44 and Route 22 on Saturday, Nov. 8, 2025

Photo by Nathan Miller

The fatal shooting of Alex Pretti, and before him Renée Good, by federal agents in Minnesota is not just a tragedy; it is a warning. In the aftermath, Trump administration officials released an account of events that directly contradicted citizen video recorded at the scene. Those recordings, made by ordinary people exercising their rights, showed circumstances sharply at odds with the official narrative. Once again, the public is asked to choose between the administration’s version of events and the evidence of its own eyes.

This moment underscores an essential truth: the right to record law enforcement is not a nuisance or a provocation; it is a safeguard. As New York Times columnist David French put it, “Citizen video has decisively rebutted the administration’s lies. The evidence of our eyes contradicts the dishonesty of the administration’s words.”

Keep ReadingShow less