Rick Wilson Banned from X - Speech Violation or Not?

Mar 20, 2025

Cross-posted by Free Thinking Through the Fourth Turning with Sasha Stone

"It clearly falls under the incitement clause, even though Matt makes a number of good points. The quesiton to ask is: if Queen of Sleaze Wilson had posted about Ford, would he have still be banned? Ther answer is yes. Beyond that, Musk personally is not the issue - this is a call to attack the person and/or property of EVERYONE ELSE who happened to buy a Tesla. And that's why this is so egregious - Musk is a public figure and can be attacked in a zillion ways a private person cannot be - I know this because I was an elected official in California - the rules are different for public and private. And this post targets PRIVATE people. Still concerned about the ban, but this is not a "wigggler" - Wilson is calling for acts of violence against private citizens."

CheckMate

When I saw that Rick Wilson had been perma-banned from X I have to admit the schadenfreude was quite pleasurable. I didn’t think twice about it until Matt Taibbi brought up that it might not represent the values Elon Musk was committed to when he bought X, to align it closer to the First Amendment when it came to free speech. Seems fair enough.

They banned the sitting president, Trump, after January 6th using the incitement reason. The question is, was Rick Wilson’s tweet protected speech?

Here is his tweet (which is in my last story):

The cover photo shows a Tesla on fire. The headline says “Elon has a weak spot. Attack.” I put my full faith in Matt on this one. He knows more than I do. But it seems to me that you can’t get any more clear than a picture of a Tesla on fire and an order to attack.

Here is what it says per USC:

Certain limited categories of speech do not receive First Amendment protection. The following speech may not be protected:

Speech that is intended and likely to provoke imminent unlawful action (“incitement”).
Statements where the speaker means to communicate a serious expression of an intent to commit an act of unlawful violence to a particular individual or group of individuals (“true threats”).
Face-to-face communication of abusive and insulting language that, by its very utterance, inflicts injury, or tends to incite an immediate breach of the peace (“fighting words”).
Material that appeals to the prurient interest, that depicts sexual conduct in a patently offensive way, and that, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value (“obscenity”).
False communications that harm an individual’s reputation, cause the general public to despise or disrespect them, or injure them in their business or employment (“defamation”).
Harassment that violates the Policy on Prohibited Discrimination, Harassment, and Retaliation.
Speech that infringes on the First Amendment rights of others (“heckler’s veto”).

I personally think calling Elon Musk a Nazi is defamation but since he’s a public figure that would be hard to prove. That much of this violence against Tesla (and in some cases, Tesla owners) is fueled by the lie that he is a Nazi and proved it with the Nazi salute.

Anyway, I thought I would throw it out to you, smart readers, and see what you think.