AK Supreme Court Rules Against Internet TROLLS!

Sen. Lora ReinBOLD took them on and won.

Notice to International Readers: This site can be read in six languages. Just peck the popup at the bottom of the page to change from English. Ang site na ito ay mababasa sa anim na wika. I-peck lang ang popup sa ibaba ng page para magpalit mula sa

Credit where credit is due. The AK Supreme Court has ruled correctly by accepting and approving former AK Senator Lora Reinbold’s Petition for Review in the Lawfare Freedom of Speech case brought by Bobbie McDow and the Northern Justice Project, LLC (NJP).

Lawfare is the use of legal systems and institutions to damage or delegitimize an opponent, or to deter an individual’s usage of their legal rights. It is a weapon of choice for political liberals confident of Alaska Courts bias.

Sen. Reinbold stated: I am grateful for the High Court’s swift and favorable ruling. The high court granted some much-needed relief, after vigorously fighting this frivolous lawsuit for nearly three years.

Success in this instance is extraordinary because Sen. Reinbold is representing herself without an attorney. Reinbold personally wrote all the pleadings that the high Court reviewed. The AK Supreme Court rarely accepts such Petitions (known as an interlocutory appeal). Of the few they accept; the high Court rarely agrees with Petitioner.

Reinbold didn’t run for re-election to the Senate partly due to this legal challenge by Troll Promoters.

The Setup

Believing that McDow was a troll, Sen. Reinbold blocked her temporarily from commenting on or about April 29, 2021. McDow and NJP swiftly filed a lawsuit against Sen. Reinbold the next day. Plaintiffs alleged that the Senator had violated McDow’s First Amendments free speech rights, by temporarily blocking her from commenting on the page. Once Reinbold was informed McDow was a constituent, she argued McDow still had access to the page and to all official communication channels.

AK Constitution Art.1:5

Every person may freely speak, write, and publish on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that right.

Plaintiff McDow didn’t Care about her Senator’s Facebook Information

McDow asked the court for a monetary payment, a declaration from the judge that her rights had been violated, and an injunction against Sen. Reinbold. The injunction would bar the Senator from EVER blocking a commenter in the future, setting a new precedent in the State.

What kind of Court would do THAT?

Reinbold contends that in any civil discourse, the moderator must be able to uphold decorum/manner restrictions to promote and protect meaningful and respectful discourse. Reinbold was upholding the legislative social media policy guidelines in place and Facebook community standards. The Senator’s posted rules stated: No trolls, no profanity, no cruelty, no bullying. Be respectful or your comments may not be up for long.

[1] Legislative Social Media Policy, 2011

In December 2022, Superior Court Judge Thomas Matthews unexpectedly ruled that Reinbold was a state actor, who was acting under color of law while managing her legislative Facebook page. He also determined that the Facebook page was a government limited public forum. Matthews controversial rulings gave McDow standing in the case, and he scheduled it for trial.

In late December 2023, the AK Supreme Court remanded the McDow v. Reinbold case back to the Superior Court, for further proceedings on Reinbold’s (Second) Motion to Dismiss.

Many government officials (Including Judges) appear to believe the AK Legislature works for them—especially in the capital of Backwater Juneau where elected legislators are sequestered from the majority of Alaskans during session every year as captives of SOA Legislative Affairs Agency (LAA) and special interests based primarily in Seattle. The Capital computer network is controlled by LAA. If NJP truly cared about Free Speech Protections of respectable constituents, they might have sued the LAA agency which provides the internet platform. But of course, the perverse intent of NJP is to restrict rational and dignified speech in favor of disruptive (Typically Liberal) persons seeking attention through abusive online behavior.

Reinbold’s Challenge

In her winning legal briefs, Defendant Reinbold challenged the order from Superior Court Judge Matthews compelling discovery, ordering Reinbold to sign a records release with Meta/Facebook. Reinbold petitioned AK Supreme Court to review the controversial order. By siding with Reinbold the high Court vacated Judge Matthews’ discovery order and barred further discovery until the question of immunity is resolved.

Nobody saw THAT coming!

The same Judge Matthews on January 12, 2024 granted a motion for partial summary judgment on two of three claims brought by Mark Kelsey, (former publisher of the Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman from 2011 to 2016) and now also a certified Internet Troll. Rep. Kevin McCabe was deemed to be acting under the color of the law—that is, in an official capacity—when he blocked Kelsey from the Representative Kevin J. McCabe Facebook page, because Judge Matthews believes McCabe’s page was a public forum.

[2] Mat-Su legislator loses part of social media lawsuit after judge’s ruling, AK Public Media, January 17, 2022

If Kelsey believed he had a legitimate reason to publish Rep. McCabe’s views he might have asked for an interview under the color of PRESS, but he was no longer affiliated with a legitimate media company. Kelsey is just another AK former Entertainment News hack.

[3]What is Entertainment-NEWS Good For? DONN LISTON, August 23, 2023

Everything on Facebook is a Public Forum

Conservative elected officials are fair game for harassment by Entertainment News outlets. I had previously questioned Plaintiff McDow’s alleged constitutional right in charges against Reinbold:

From that story:

We must be amused by the argument that McDow was denied Constitutionally protected Facebook Glory by not getting to inject her venom into Sen. Reinbold’s online constituent page. Further, it takes a pathetic person to believe whatever she can regurgitate from the Teamsters Political Propaganda Program has value. While amused, however, we need to simply acknowledge such boorish online harassment is low class.

McDow Teamster Union Recognition

Last June 29, 2023 this writer asked why the mob behind Kelly Merrick had to attack Sen. Reinbold?

…it might be time to review what happened in a recent time when a conservative Alaska elected official was BOLD. Of course, that would be Lora Reinbold, who is now standing alone in the tender clutches of the Alaska Court System in two cases aimed at diminishing her as a rational and BOLD conservative who represented her Chugach-Eagle River constituents with conservative aplomb.

Do you see how this works? It’s about Facebook Glory! When Reinbold didn’t accept as an article of faith that masks protect against a virus–that everything the government says is true–she offended Plaintiff McDow. And, when Sen. Reinbold had an abusive person creating an on-going Facebook Drama to get attention for herself and the guys at NEA-Alaska/AFL-CIO, she was so BOLD as to cut her off—temporarily from her Facebook page.

[4] Q: Why must THE MOB attack Sen. Reinbold?

The AK Supreme Court Agreed with Reinbold!

AK Supreme Court has also imposed an obligation on Plaintiff McDow–that her attorneys must prove that the constitutional right that was allegedly violated was clearly established to post on social media pages.

Reinbold’s Facebook page allowed comments from citizens. Plaintiff McDow repeatedly posted some comments that Senator Reinbold believed violated the rules of conduct/manner restrictions, which were outlined on the Senator Lora Reinbold Facebook Page. Reinbold defended herself before the court using the Communication Decency Act Good Samaritan provisions in Title 47 Sec 230. Judge Matthews denied her these protections, so Reinbold appealed.

[4] Reinbold is also suing Seattle Airlines

If Plaintiff McDow cannot establish a Constitutional Right, then Senator Reinbold is entitled to qualified immunity; Legislators are immune from lawsuits, the events took place while Reinbold was a Senator, thus she could not be sued for any monetary damages.

The 9th Circuit Appeals Court has already ruled that a 1^st Amendment right has not been clearly established. The United States Supreme Court has agreed to hear cases about ‘state action’ and social media, with rulings expected this spring.

When she was a member of the House of Representatives, this writer was proud to be part of Rep. Reinbold’s staff during the 30^th Session in 2018.

Reinbold’s trial was originally set for January 2024. It has now been moved to March 2024, and may be delayed, due to the Supreme Court’s orders. Reinbold said: I have spent over $100,000 on fees in these case, and devoted thousands of hours defending myself.

That is the cost for being authentic and willing to stand on principle as an elected official in Alaska. Not too many people can afford it so voters deserve the candidates they elect to represent them in Juneau.

References:

[1] Legislative Counsel Social Media Policy, September 29, 2011

[2] Juneau’s Influence on Alaska Lawmakers, DONN LISTON, January 5, 2018

[3]What is Entertainment-NEWS Good For? DONN LISTON, August 23, 2023

[4] Mat-Su legislator loses part of social media lawsuit after judge’s ruling, AK Public Media, January 17, 2022

[5] Q: Why must THE MOB attack Sen. Reinbold?

 [5]Senator Reinbold Sues Seattle Airlines