{"id":8103,"date":"2020-03-06T10:42:58","date_gmt":"2020-03-06T15:42:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blog.lawyer.com\/?p=8103"},"modified":"2020-04-17T11:10:57","modified_gmt":"2020-04-17T15:10:57","slug":"google-runs-from-lawsuit","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blog.lawyer.com\/index.php\/google-runs-from-lawsuit\/","title":{"rendered":"Google Runs from Lawsuit"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"<\/a>
Affecting the opinions of voters?<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

As the 2020 presidential election quickly approaches, former democratic candidates are coming forward to justify why they felt they could not or did not progress further in the race. Hawaii representative, Tulsi Gabbard, is one such candidate.\u00a0 In July 2019, Gabbard filed a lawsuit against Google, claiming the ever-popular technology company inhibited Gabbard\u2019s web presence by temporarily suspending her campaign ad account.\u00a0 Gabbard sought damages in the amount of $50 million.\u00a0Just this past week, a California Central District Court judge dismissed the case.<\/p>\n

According to court documents and Twitter, following the first democratic debate, viewers were restricted<\/a> from searching any information on Gabbard\u2019s campaign.\u00a0 From Gabbard\u2019s Twitter account, it is clear that Google\u2019s reasoning for briefly suspending the account was initially unknown to Gabbard.\u00a0 The only likely explanation imaginable was to attempt to manipulate the results of the race.\u00a0 Determined to be a critical moment in Gabbard\u2019s pursuit for candidacy, following the first debate, she felt her First Amendment right to free speech was violated.\u00a0In Gabbard\u2019s argument, her influence and communication to American voters was stifled.<\/p>\n

The apparent mistake made by Gabbard was the degree of authority she afforded Google in determining the race for presidential elections.\u00a0 The judge assigned to the case did not agree with the allegation that Google \u201chelps to run elections,\u201d making it clear that the company\u2019s policies were not comparable to governmental regulation of an election.\u00a0 Google is not considered a government entity that is able to infringe upon the First Amendment free speech rights of individuals.<\/p>\n

Regardless of Google\u2019s position in allegedly violating rights of the American people, a representative for the company commented after the fact that the system automatically identified unusual activity on the campaign account, which led to the suspension.\u00a0 In Google\u2019s defense, the company claims it had no intentional motive to sway the opinions of voters away from Gabbard\u2019s campaign. On the other hand, Gabbard maintains that Google\u2019s actions served as a hit against democracy.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

As the 2020 presidential election quickly approaches, former democratic candidates are coming forward to justify why they felt they could not or did not progress further in the race. Hawaii…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":230,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_seopress_robots_primary_cat":"","_seopress_titles_title":"","_seopress_titles_desc":"","_seopress_robots_index":"","_s2mail":"yes","footnotes":""},"categories":[548],"tags":[2725,802,43,472,700],"class_list":["post-8103","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-lawsuits","tag-campaign","tag-election","tag-first-amendment","tag-free-speech","tag-violation"],"post_mailing_queue_ids":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.lawyer.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8103","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.lawyer.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.lawyer.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.lawyer.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/230"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.lawyer.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=8103"}],"version-history":[{"count":7,"href":"https:\/\/blog.lawyer.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8103\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":8161,"href":"https:\/\/blog.lawyer.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8103\/revisions\/8161"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.lawyer.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8103"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.lawyer.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=8103"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.lawyer.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=8103"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}