Former President Donald Trump is suing Facebook, Twitter and Google’s YouTube over their suspensions of his accounts after a mob of his supporters attacked the U.S. Capitol in January.
Trump filed class action complaints in federal court in Florida, alleging the tech giants are censoring him and other conservatives — a long-running complaint on the right for which there is little evidence and that the companies deny. See complaint here:
The suits call for the court “to order an immediate halt to social media companies’ illegal, shameful censorship of the American people,” Trump said at a news conference at his golf club in Bedminster, N.J. “We’re demanding an end to the shadow banning, a stop to the silencing and a stop to the blacklisting, banishing and canceling that you know so well.”
The long-shot legal actions are the latest escalation in Trump’s long-running feud with the social media platforms that he used prolifically before and during his presidency.
After the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, the companies kicked Trump off their platforms, citing the risk of further violence. Twitter banned Trump permanently, Facebook has suspended him for two years and YouTube has said it will let him return only “when we determine that the risk of violence has decreased.”
In Tuesday’s lawsuits, the former president accuses the companies of violating his First Amendment rights and of behaving like “state actors” rather than private companies in putting restrictions on what people can post.
He has asked the court to order the companies to reinstate him and other members of the proposed class of plaintiffs.
He also wants the court to declare a federal law, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, unconstitutional. That 1996 law says online sites largely are not legally responsible for what their users post. While in office, in retaliation for Twitter’s fact-checking of his tweets, Trump signed an executive order attempting to strip social media companies of Section 230 protection. (President Biden has revoked the order.)
In addition to the companies, the lawsuits name Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey and Google CEO Sundar Pichai as defendants, although not YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki.
Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim is a litigant in several court cases in Alameda County Superior Court, California State Appeals Court, California State Supreme Court and Northern California Federal Court.
ALL the cases involve the corruption of the courts, judges, court administration, law enforcement, opposing counsels, spearheaded by then California State Senator Kamala Harris, Judge Carvill, Judge Clay, Judge Kim Colwel, Alameda County District Attorney Nancy O’Malley, Oakland City Attorney Barbara Parker, Google, and Twitter, among others.
The admissions of such are riddled throughout the many court documents as reflected in: “A party is entitled to challenge a judicial officer for cause or bias.” “The challenges appear to be filed in an earnest belief that the judges of this Court ought to be disqualified from deciding this case and that each successive challenge will overcome the prior’s shortcomings.””the Court hopes and encourages both parties to take this new judicial assignment as a good time to wipe the slate clean, forgive any earlier acrimony, and proceed to resolve and adjudicate the claims raised by the Complaint in normal order and good faith. Al-Hakim deserves a chance to have his claims adjudicated.” “Both parties deserve the rights to fair procedure and due process guaranteed to them by law. In short, this case deserves a chance to proceed on its merits, and now is an opportune time as any to do so.” Judge Stephen Kaus, Tentative Ruling made September 11, 2018
Judge Kaus admits to the COURTEL’S acrimony and animus toward al-Hakim, and asks to wipe the slate clean and move forward in good faith as al-Hakim deserves a chance to have his claims adjudicated with “the rights to fair procedure and due process guaranteed to them by law”! He did just the opposite enacting the agenda of the “COURTEL- ” the COURT CORRUPTION CARTEL!!
The admissions are reflected in: ”Here, Mr. al-Hakim alleges a litany of serious misconduct or outright criminality – by persons other than Judge Carvill, He complains of past mistreatment by numerous judges (and at least one commissioner)” Judge Lesley Holland
Judge Lesley Holland criminality comments portray perhaps the single most important reason why the “COURTEL- Court Cartel”, California Supreme Court, California Appeal Court, Judicial Council, the Commission on Judicial Performance, and these heads of the disciplinary bodies responsible for taking corrective action in these cases, has been so derelict in doing so, is because they are inextricably placed in the legal paradox where every judge, court administrator, attorney, law firm, defendant and their agents having been involved in committing these crimes, opens the way to legally setting aside every case they were ever involved with and potentially being reversed at an untold cost of money, integrity and irreparable loss of public confidence in the legal system!
al-Hakim has personally have filed and won seventeen (17) Successful Judicial Recusals from Court Challenges of judges for Cause! This fact alone portrays the corruption that I have exposed in the Alameda County Superior Court, California State Appeals Court, California State Supreme Court and Northern California Federal Courts! See: https://nowtruth.org/al-hakim-has-seventeen-17-successful-recusals-from-judicial-challenges/
This one matter of interest to BOTH is a case of fraud that al-Hakim fought for over twenty two (22) years and requested fees and costs that was denied when he won. al-Hakim had a waiver in that case and the fees should be recouped.
The third parties, including defendants, were then California State Senator Kamala Harris, Alameda County District Attorney Nancy O’Malley, Oakland City Attorney Barbara Parker, Judge Kim Colwel, Google, and Twitter, among others, were part of the appeals case, which the court was fully aware of because I filed and served notice of the problems of the court interfering with the subpoenas and request for production on Judge Clay in November 2017. The nature of those request address the many complaints filed and served on the court over the last 20+ years and serves to prove the contentions raised in the findings of judge Holland in his administrative ruling on the challenge of judge Carvill and Madden, the “criminality”, the corrupt actions of judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities, he listed by name Alameda County District Attorney Nancy O’Malley, Oakland City Attorney Barbara Parker, California State Senator Kamala Harris, and judge Kim Colwell. These many complaints that are subject of the appeal action directly involve judge Carvill and Judge Clay, and how our 6 Twitter accounts were shut down by then California State Senator Kamala Harris, DA O’Malley, City Attorney Barbara Parker, Alameda County Superior Court Administration and Chad Finke to censor and silence our public expression of the corruption that Holland mentions. And it presents new and different issues that have not been raised before and the courts must address them.In your suit, you will be able to glean many substantive facts and acts from our case, the Subpoenas, Request for Production of Documents, Motions to Compel, and their Replies that you may use in your suit against Google, Facebook, and Twitter.
As then Attorney General “Kriminal Harass” and the Office of The Attorney General of The State of California substituted in as attorney of record in this case for the Alameda County Department of Child Support Services allegedly “in the interest of justice”. What justice is there in the Attorney General defending, concealing and thereby further complicitly committing the admitted willful and intentional extrinsic fraud upon the court; prosecutorial misconduct; willful and malicious prosecution; misconduct; conflict of interest; obstruction of justice; denial of due process under the law; willful and intentional fabrication and authoring false evidence; misstating and mischaracterizing evidence; misrepresentation and concealment of material facts with knowledge of the truth with the intent to induce the court’s act or reliance; harassment; and intimidation on behalf of District Attorney Nancy O’Malley, former DA Tom Orloff, Maureen Lenahan, Valgeria Harvey, counselors L. Lavagetto, Ms. K. Pendergrass, Ms. Adler, Kris Ferre, and accountant Mr. Lovelady and others unnamed in the DA’s office; various judges and Commissioner Oleon’s abuse of discretion, willful misconduct, conduct prejudicial, illegal ex-parte communications and bias that resulted in error.
This was done to excuse and protect the Alameda County Department of Child Support Services from their ongoing conflict of interest in their alleging to represent the interest of Joette Hall, whom they had defrauded along with al-Hakim of the funds paid to the DCSS in trust for their minor child.
The Alameda County Department of Child Support Services was never representing the al-Hakim Hall family, they were defending and covering up their extrinsic fraud upon the state and the families. The Alameda County Department of Child Support Services wanted to conceal their attempted coercion of al-Hakim to pay the arrearage they created in his name. al-Hakim and his family had complained many times each year about the misapplication of the funds tendered to the Department of Child Support Services in trust for the al-Hakim Hall family.
You can find those documents at:
You can view and/or download 290 page Appeals Court Subpoena Request for Production of Documents and Depositions for Kamala Harris.pdf here:
https://app.box.com/s/anfjzbqxe1vgkahy52fqisaf9cvgr9on
Here you can view or download al-Hakim’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Request for Production of Documents served on the California Attorney General Kamal Harris.pdf https://app.box.com/s/a5ia5phh9dj8de7gpxfex04cz6uq2e95
Feigning ignorance in the letter, she asks al-Hakim to clarify the request, if under PRA, wherein they will respond accordingly. Every one of you herein has done the exact same thing for years only to have the evidence of crime against you mount to a point of insurmountable!
As a result, al-Hakim clarified the Demand for Production of Documents for each of them therein that has had a previous request made. If there is no compliance in seven (7) days, we will file formal Request for Production of Documents and Depositions on each herein. He would start with Attorney Generals Jerry Brown, Kamala Harris, and Ms. Soto.
In a separate letter Soto made the same request for an extension of time to comply the very same day! The letter can be read or downloaded at:
AG Harris- Orick FOIA Response
https://app.box.com/s/zcl41lib06z12ninb2dzqlsigl4tpyer
and
AG Harris- Soto FOIA Response
https://app.box.com/s/7f8u8dr274z6wdskgx40a0auujpw7uf3
Additionally, on May 6, 2014 and July 3, 2014 Orick left voice mail messages for me regarding the Attorney General’s response. The voice mail can be listen to or downloaded at:
May 6, 2014 https://app.box.com/s/kpnvn0lvx74bm8dahsc5vgd2686zfdyd
July 3, 2014 https://app.box.com/s/uexrxsxwjfkpavxdaetwqqk1z1wcev2j
By letter attached dated May 2, 2014, al-Hakim informed both Ms. Soto and Mr. Orick that the FOIA/Brown Act Request filed on April 7, 2014 and their acknowledged receipt from both dated April 17, 2014 that they have both for the Attorney General failed and refused to comply with ANY of the requested information as per the law by providing NO RESPONSE AT ALL. This implies that the original request they both made on April 17, 2014 at the conclusion of the required time to provide the information was totally disingenuous! The letter can be read or downloaded at:
https://app.box.com/s/vf4tnpxz7mhx9t545d80e6sqhxvuh138
In an attached letter dated May 28, 2014, to Mrs. Harris, Ms. Soto, Mr. Orick and Custodian of Records requesting again that the Attorney General respond to the request, to comply with all relevant deadlines and other obligations set forth in FOIA and the agency’s regulations. 5 U.S.C. § 552, (a)(6)(A)(i); 26 a.F.R. § 601.702(c)(9)(ii). Pursuant to 26 C.F.R. § 601.702(c)(2)(i), I would prefer the responsive records be provided in an electronic format. Attorney General’s March 2009 FOIA memorandum, reiterating President Obama’s directive that in “the face of doubt, openness prevails.” Attorney General, Memorandum for Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies at 1 (March 19, 2009) (Attorney General Memorandum). They have yet to comply or even respond! The letter can be read or downloaded at: https://app.box.com/s/feolyhbt0rchngtugayi5cj8chr9mayj
But as any good politician has done, Harris has actually been involved in stealing child support from Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim’s minor child with an outstanding order! She not only worked in the DA’s office during the time this embezzlement was happening but then represented the Department of Child Support Services and the DA’s office AGAINST al-Hakim.
Now 25 years later, that minor child that Kriminal Harass embezzled is Bari al-Hakim-Williams. My daughter was Legal Counsel and head of Strategic Purchasing at FaceBook whom also was a Kamala Harris fundraiser. As a youth and until just recently, Harris was involved in Embezzlling Child Support PAID in TRUST to the District Attorney Office, O’Malley, and tried to frame ME as the father! As a Family we objected and took action against the DA, DCSS, and Harris then subs in as AG in the interest of Justice! What standing can she have when we are fighting THEM as the TRUE defendants whom are trying to sabotage the case claiming to represent the same Family they Embezzlled! When we posted about it, the post was scrubbed FROM THE ENTIRE INTERNET as well as my daughter’s photo from the White House with then President Obama that labeled her as Legal Counsel at FaceBook! I was NEVER informed that the posts was removed, I found out when asked to repost it. It was labeled as “false information”. When I contested it with the facts, the label was removed! This was being done by O’Malley and Harris whom also had our Twitter 6 accounts banned for presenting the SAME information! How could the information be labeled “false” when we have a letter from the District Attorney ADMITTING they stole the money from my girls! We are still moving this case forward and I can remind you that we also had submitted documents to the FBI offices to notify them of this corruption. They did nothing. “What is the Pot calling the Kettle?” : https://nowtruth.org/vp-kamala-kriminal-harass-harris-embezzled-child-support-from-facebook-legal-counsel-and-fundraiser-extorts-parents-targets-and-threatens-father/
Bari al-Hakim-Williams has hosted and attended multiple fundraisers for Harris, even held at her home! See: https://nowtruth.org/290-page-subpeona-request-for-production-of-documents-and-depositions-for-kamala-harris/
Subpoenas for Google, FaceBook and Twitter To Produce Documents and Depositions
You can view and/or download the Subpoena for Google Subpoena To Produce Documents and Depositions here: https://app.box.com/s/k3nflq6e3h4si950z3mkl23kpalbf8y8
You can view and/or download the Subpoena for Twitter To Produce Documents and Depositions here: https://app.box.com/s/vx0ucnc0awfzv0fvzi0fryem34qlgkwz
Google and Twitter opposed the motions ONLY AFTER the replies had been served on them, which makes the oppositions invalid. But worst by offering the lamest excuses to conceal their collusion in the corruption case that involves ALL the parties mentioned above!
Twitter completely lied in their opposition saying they just received the subpoena at the same time they have to reply to the motion to compel, the November 8 hearing date! They received the subpoena on August 8, 2017 and were to have their reply back to us by September 8, 2017!! We have received nothing from them until now.
Google claimed in their opposition to the motion to compel they would have to hire techs just to search their own files for the documents and that research would be too expensive to perform!!! GOOGLE, THE WORLDS LEADER IN SEARCH CAPABILITY AND WORTH OVER $500 BILLION!!! What a joke! They also make reference to the FBI, possible illegal surveillance, data mining and gathering of information on Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim, his family, businesses, and communities.
The District Attorney, Nancy O’Malley filed a completely perjurious document that would indict her, but they “forgot” to sign it! Hummm? They claim they NEVER received the subpoena but have revealed they have 286 page document that was also filed with the court!
The “COURTEL” – the Superior Court Corruption CARTEL, California Judicial Council, and Oakland City Attorney Barbara Parker ALL failed and refused to file ANY opposition to the subpoenas and I am sure they will NOT show up in court. Their motions are below for your pleasure.
You MUST read these motions and oppositions as you will NOT believe them!!
You can download or view the subpoenas, oppositions and trial notices here:
Motion to Compel Google Subpoena and Request for Production
https://app.box.com/s/k3nflq6e3h4si950z3mkl23kpalbf8y8
Google Opposition to Motion to Compel Subpoena and Request for Production
https://app.box.com/s/9kxio9lia2tqnvz2nkgg5e4ypqel585b
Motion to Compel O’Malley Subpoena and Request for Production
https://app.box.com/s/y7xbnead5tf0r4cqqp5xqm2cluh1abob
O’Malley Opposition to Motion to Compel Subpoena and Request for Production
https://app.box.com/s/3ra9yspmu8c3935mwpmfnl40cppo69yh
Twitter Opposition to Motion to Compel Subpoena and Request for Production
https://app.box.com/s/milnerzx4yholsnrh3fxl6romq5pfn6c
Twitter Filed Subpoena and Request for Production.pdf:
https://app.box.com/s/vx0ucnc0awfzv0fvzi0fryem34qlgkwz
Twitter Filed Motion to Compel Subpoena and Request for Production.pdf
https://app.box.com/s/8ajqihs2l0ba9wahpwjapnx1uil40luq
We are also adding FaceBook to our list of “third party defendants” as they have very active in the censorship of our activities as reflected in our post:
Spokespeople for Facebook and Twitter declined to comment. YouTube and Google did not respond to a request for comment.
Previous attempts to sue the platforms over their content-moderation decisions have been quickly tossed by courts. Last week, a federal judge blocked a new Florida law from taking effect. It would have fined large social media companies if they banned politicians. The court said the law likely violated the First Amendment.
Section 230 has come under broader scrutiny from both Republicans and Democrats in recent years, with lawmakers on both sides of the aisle saying its liability protections should be pared back. However, they are divided on what reform would look like, with Republicans focusing their criticisms on alleged censorship and Democrats seeking to hold the companies more responsible for misinformation and other harmful content.
You must be logged in to post a comment.