Long story short: A federal judge ruled May 23 that President Trump cannot legally block people on Twitter.
Twitter is a "public forum" and, as such, blocking on Twitter is a violation of the First Amendment, the judge argued.
The White House this week appealed the ruling.
Over the past couple of years, Trump has blocked critics like novelist Stephen King, comedian Rosie O'Donnell -- and me. (Here's WIRED's list of the people Trump has blocked.)
While I am among the blocked, although not part of the original lawsuit that prompted the ruling, you may be surprised to learn that I think the White House is right on this one.
The reason is that blocking on Twitter doesn't actually block.
All you need to do is log out of Twitter, and log into another account (which anyone can set up in a few seconds). Once logged in, you can see Trump's tweets, comment and all the rest.
In other words, a president says lots of things and his comments are available in lots of places. But a tweet, even for a blocked user, is among the easiest of those comment types to find -- and comment upon.
Granted, when I log in with a different Twitter account, my second account is not verified and, as such, has less priority in the list of comments. But Twitter verification is not a Constitutionally protected status.
I also think there's some distinction to be made between a president's @potus account, which belongs to whomever is president and therefore more or less belongs to "the people," and any president's own personal account, which belongs to that citizen personally.
I don't see why getting elected president removes a citizen's right to use Twitter like everybody else can.