Ocasio-Cortez Set to Testify in Lawsuit Challenging Blocking of Twitter Follower
U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-New York, was sued over the management of her @AOC Twitter account the same day that the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a trial judge's ruling that President Donald Trump violated the First Amendment by blocking people from his @realDonaldTrump Twitter account.
September 27, 2019 at 02:18 PM
4 minute read
U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-New York, a federal judge has determined, has agreed to testify in Brooklyn federal court in a lawsuit brought by a former New York state assemblyman who was blocked from her @AOC Twitter account.
At an evidentiary hearing Thursday, Senior U.S. District Judge Frederic Block of the Eastern District of New York said Ocasio-Cortez should testify before the case, which was filed in July, moves forward. The Daily News reported that Block at the Thursday hearing said "I think she needs to testify here."
Ocasio-Cortez' lawyer Joseph Sandler of Sandler, Reiff, Lamb, Rosenstein & Birkenstock confirmed that Ocasio-Cortez would testify in the matter, without further action from Block. A date for her testimony had not been set as of Friday, according to Sandler.
Former New York State Assemblyman Dov Hikind, D-Brooklyn, who runs an organization called Americans Against Anti-Semitism, sued in July after his verified Twitter account was blocked by Ocasio-Cortez' verified Twitter account.
Hikind's lawyers argue that he was blocked "purely because of his speech in support of Jewish values and Israel," making the case a First Amendment question, according to court documents and attorney Jacob Weinstein, who is representing Hikind.
Ocasio-Cortez, who has said people are only blocked from her Twitter account for harassment, in her answer to the complaint last month asked for the suit to be dismissed with prejudice.
Hikind filed his suit the same day that Second U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a Southern District of New York ruling that President Donald Trump violated the First Amendment by blocking people from his @realDonaldTrump Twitter account.
In that case, Columbia University's Knight First Amendment Institute sued Trump on behalf of seven people blocked from his Twitter account, arguing that they were being deprived of a public forum under the First Amendment.
Both Trump and Ocasio-Cortez have official Twitter accounts related to their jobs—@POTUS and @RepAOC, respectively—but they use the accounts that predate their offices more often and discuss political issues on those accounts, according to court documents.
Hikind's complaint repeatedly cited the Trump ruling. A petition from Trump's legal team for a rehearing en banc is currently pending.
In August, the Knight Institute wrote a letter to Ocasio-Cortez saying that her Twitter blocking was unconstitutional and offering to help her develop a social media policy.
In a response on Twitter, Ocasio-Cortez wrote that fewer than 20 Twitter users were blocked from her account due to "ongoing harassment," including the distribution of fake nude images claiming to feature her. She said none of the people blocked were her constituents. Hikind lives outside her district, according to court documents.
While a date for Ocasio-Cortez' testimony was not confirmed Friday, Hikind's lawyer Jacob Weinstein said Block suggested dates in late October and early November, indicating that the judge wants the case to move quickly.
READ MORE:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllSo Who Won? Congestion Pricing Ruling Leaves Both Sides Claiming Victory, Attorneys Seeking Clarification
4 minute readHochul Vetoes 'Grieving Families' Bill, Faulting a Lack of Changes to Suit Her Concerns
Court System Names New Administrative Judges for New York City Courts in Leadership Shakeup
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1'Pickier' Law Firms Did Mergers at Same Rate Last Year as 2023
- 2Boxing Promoter Don King Hit With $3B Lawsuit Over Cancellation of 'Rumble in the Jungle 2'
- 3Letter From London: 5 Predictions for Big Law in 2025, Plus 5 More Risky Ones
- 4Crypto Groups Sue IRS Over Decentralized Finance Reporting Rule
- 5Jenner Brings Back Zachary Schauf from DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250