When Twitter pressured the Justice Department for an explanation, according to the filing, the government said the subpoena was part of a criminal investigation into a possible violation of a federal statute that makes it a crime to use interstate communications to threaten injury. tosomeone. But the government declined to flag any particular tweet that was a threat.
The company’s filing asked the judge overseeing the matter to examine the basis for the Justice Department’s motivations to go after the user.
“As the custodian entrusted with the privately identifiable information sought by the government, Twitter is concerned that the subpoena is not supported by a legitimate law enforcement purpose and that therefore there can be no need , much less an urgent need, for the government to unmask the user, “wrote a Twitter lawyer in the court motion.
He continued: “As such, Twitter requests that the court participate in a search analysis of the government’s basis for issuing the subpoena in order to determine whether the subpoena violates the First Amendment and should be vacated.”
The grand jury summons had been obtained by the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia. At the time, the office was led on an interim basis by Michael R. Sherwin, who had been installed by Attorney General William P. Barr.
A spokeswoman for that office did not respond to a request for comment or explanation, even if the underlying investigation remained open. The text of the subpoena, which was attached to Twitter’s court filing, suggested that the investigation was being conducted by the Capitol Police, which protects members of Congress.
A spokesperson for Nunes did not respond to a request for comment.
The person who operates the @NunesAlt account seemed surprised by the presentation, writing in a post on Monday afternoon he said that “there was nothing extraordinary about me” and added: “So why is an American congressman suing me? Why would the Justice Department ever attack me? Are tweets bad and memes bad? “
