From what I think, the President should not block anyone from access to information regardless of their political stance. But on the other hand, he would be wrong if he blocked anyone from the White House's handle. But he only blocked them from his personal account, which is his First Ammendment right.

As a private citizen, if the POTUS cannot block people from his personal twitter, it will be illegal for me to block my stalker, a kid cannot block a bully. This is not good.

If the POTUS had not conducted the country's business on his personal account I might be able to agree with your point. But your point is not in agreement with the ruling. The court investigates what he's doing with the account, not whose name is on it.

But, all the official policies and government information are released by proper White House channel and media releases. Trump is not blocking that. Also, tweets are not considered binding legal business until they are officially released by White House. So, why should it violate any law? Or any journalist trying to obtain information. They, like any other citizen, are entitled to the information released by White House.

Consider, it like this. If Trump had a group of friends who he likes to discuss country's policy with. Is it legally binding that, he has to inculde everyone in that group and cannot ban enyone from his friend club? Consider this friend club to be his twitter followers.

P.S. I am not a republican or even an American. I am just trying to create a constructive dialogue about the ruling and what laws come to play to enforce it.

If he's discussing with his group of friends behind closed doors either at the White House, a dinner, or the like, there is no expectation that he must share it publicly (but there's the possibility of leaks).

If he does so on a public forum, then he is not allowed to blacklist people from hearing/seeing it. He has the @POTUS account. If he's concerned about his public vs private privileges, he may wish to consider moving his government related tweets to the @POTUS account. At that point, he can tweet support for Tomi Laren (sp?) to his heart's content from his personal account. When he's discussing world stage stuff, though, that should stick to the POTUS account. That's all.

> As a private citizen, if the POTUS cannot block people from his personal twitter, it will be illegal for me to block my stalker, a kid cannot block a bully. This is not good.

Trump can block anyone he wants from his personal Twitter...if he stops having government employees manage it as part of their job, and stops using it to announce official policy, decisions, and actions before they are released via normal government channels, and in general uses his personal Twitter for personal stuff, not for official government stuff.

This decision has no implications at all for you and your stalker, or that bullied kid.

He should probably talk about Rocket Man, directions he intends to take, and new agendas via @POTUS then.

But the thing is, though, he never will beyond boiler plate stuff that most likely someone else is posting for him. Reason being is that he doesn't own @POTUS, but does @realDonaldTrump (okay, maybe "own" is incorrect, but barring something crazy like Twitter assuming control of his account, he isn't going to turn over his personal account upon someone else being elected president). So to him, boosting the brand of @POTUS doesn't make sense because it isn't his. So I'll agree with him here: for someone deeply concerned with brand and building it, he's playing it correctly. Unfortunately for him, that also means he limits himself to mute until out of office.