First Amendment Rights of New Yorkers Violated by Congressman says New York Civil Liberties Union

In a letter this week, the New York Civil Liberties Union demanded Congressman Peter King end his years-long practice of banning constituents from commenting on his “Congressman Peter King” Facebook Page. If he doesn’t? They’ll sue on behalf of the constituents he’s blocked on social media.

According to reports, King, has blocked 70 constituents who have been critical of him from viewing or commenting on his page, violating their First Amendment rights.

“It seems that Congressman King believes he’s an actual King and can banish anyone who dares question him,” said DCCC Spokesperson Christine Bennett. “If the Congressman is not interested in hearing from his constituents, perhaps he should retire.”

Among those banned from the Congressman’s page are:

A Great River resident who was banned minutes after confronting you about deleting comments: “Why are so many posts disappearing? Last night it seemed like over half the people did not agree with what Congressman King had to say, now they are all gone . . . . Aren’t Congressmen supposed to represent and listen to all his constituents even those that don’t agree with him?”

A Brightwaters resident who was banned shortly after commenting, “I am really surprised that comments asking about your upcoming votes keep getting deleted. It is either that you don’t want to explain it to non-press members or you want all the comments on your post to appear positive. I’m not sure what is worse, but it is incredibly disappointing you won’t engage with anyone unless they’re complimenting you.”

A Seaford resident who was banned the day after commenting, “Your vote yesterday was unthinkably irresponsible and does not begin to account for the thousands of constituents in your district who rely upon many of the services and provisions provided for them by the ACA, which the AHCA would strip….”

But that’s not all. Constituents who called on King hold regular Town Halls were also muzzled:

A West Islip resident who was banned after commenting, “Just listened to the phone town hall. Lots of personal issues and chitchat. Lots of important national issues not addressed due to time limits. We need a live town hall like those held by Suozzi and Rice.”

A Massapequa resident who was banned the day after commenting, “Since you don’t have the guts to face your constituents in a real town hall, I was on your virtual town hall conference call. During it, you asserted that the NY Times lies on its front page. Like the person who currently inhabits the highest office in this land, you make assertions without providing any backup. Your constituents deserve to hear from you just which stories the NY Times has published you believe are untrue, and then the Times can respond. If you aren’t able to provide any such facts, the Times deserves an apology.”

When faced with a similar case, the White House was forced to unblock the accounts of Twitter users who sued President Trump for barring them from viewing or responding to his tweets. In May of 2018, a federal judge ruled that Donald Trump had violated their constitutional rights.

###