Harmeet Dhillon uses my legal strategy to sue Twitter under the First Amendment

This post has been read 216 times!

June 17, 2021- by Steven E. Greer

Tucker Carlson interviewed First Amendment lawyer Harmeet Dhillon because she is using a novel legal strategy to sue Twitter. Even though Twitter is a private company and not normally eligible to be the target of a Section 1983 First Amendment lawsuit, she is suing them for this because they collude with the State of California to censor speech.

This was my legal strategy. I have given it to Harmeet and other lawyers using wrong tactics to sue Twitter. I got the idea from own federal First Amendment case of Greer v Mehiel.

Greer v Mehiel, 1:15-cv-6119 (February 24, 2016), declared that, if a private company, such as Twitter, conspires with a government entity to violate the First Amendment, then it too becomes liable under Section 1983 claims. “Although section 1983 only applies to acts committed under color of state law, a plaintiff may state a section 1983 claim against a private entity “on a section 1983 conspiracy theory” if the complaint “allege[s] facts demonstrating that the private entity acted in concert with the state actor to commit an unconstitutional act.” Ciambriello v. Cty. of Nassau, 292 F.3d 307, 324 (2d Cir. 2002)”

Here is the email I sent to Harmeet in 2019:

From: SG <steve@batterypark.tv>
Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2019 11:01 PM
To: ‘Harmeet K. Dhillon (DhillonLaw)’
Subject: Twitter lawsuit

I have a bigger Twitter lawsuit, however. They have shut down my accounts for no reason. The angle there is First Amendment. I am in the Second Circuit now 19-326 Greer v Mehiel for First Amendment. In my own case, there is case law generated by my lower District Judge stating that private companies, like Twitter, can be sued under First Amendment if they colluded with state actors. Of course, we all know that the CEO of Twitter meets with Democrat party leaders in secret retreats, etc. Then, of course the other lawsuits filed against Twitter point out that social media is now a public town hall matter, per SCOTUS. This is a novel strategy only I know about, it seems, based on reading the other briefs.

BTW, why Devin Nunes went to State Court is beyond me. He will fail.

 

 

This entry was posted in - 1 Autocracy Watch, - Federal government, - Politics, Gripes, Lawyers. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *