Troy Smocks has been sentenced to 14 months in federal prison and is also banned from using the now-defunct social media platform Parler after making serious threats on the app following the January 6th Capitol riots. In a surprising turn of events, Smocks is now pursuing a lawsuit against Parler for a staggering $370 million, alleging that the company violated a controversial Texas law that prohibits social media platforms from censoring users based on their political beliefs. This case raises significant questions about free speech and the responsibilities of social media companies in moderating content.
Smocks’ posts on Parler actively encouraged the insurrection on January 6th, 2021, and incited further violence the following day. He ominously stated, “Over the next 24 hours, I would say let’s get our personal affairs in order. Prepare our weapons, and then go get’em,” while posting from a hotel in Washington, DC, on January 7th. He called for retribution, saying, “Lets hunt these cowards down like the Traitors that each of them are. This includes RINOS, Dems, and Tech Execs. We now have the green light,” which underscores the dangerous rhetoric circulating on social media during that tumultuous time.
Several months later, Smocks pled guilty to making interstate threats, becoming the second individual convicted for crimes related to the attempted insurrection. However, his lawsuit claims Parler banned him “solely because of Plaintiff’s selection and voting for a political candidate, then United States President Donald J. Trump.” Notably, the lawsuit fails to mention the 59-year-old’s explicit calls for violence, which raises questions about the legal implications of free speech versus incitement.
The lawsuit, highlighted in the newsletter Court Watch, names Parler, its former CEO John Matze, and Rebekah Mercer, the billionaire conservative benefactor who privately financed the company in its early days, as defendants. This legal battle not only involves the rights of individual users but also addresses the broader issues of platform accountability and corporate governance in social media.
Matze commented to Gizmodo that he hasn’t been formally served in the lawsuit and expressed unfamiliarity with Smocks prior to the situation. He remarked, “From what I read, I feel like he is having trouble accepting his own life choices and is looking to put the blame on others.” The lack of response from Parler and Mercer indicates the complexity and potential ramifications of this case.
In Texas, a law enacted in 2021 restricts social media platforms from blocking, banning, or otherwise censoring users based on their “viewpoints.” This legislation is highly contentious and has been criticized by experts for conflicting with the First Amendment. The Constitution prohibits the government from restricting the free expression of individuals, including corporations. The act of removing a post or banning an account can be viewed as a form of speech, creating a complicated legal landscape where the conflict between state law and constitutional precedent remains unresolved.
However, this exemption might not apply in Smocks’ case, as the Texas law does allow for restrictions on speech that “directly incites criminal activity or includes specific threats of violence.” Given Smocks’ guilty plea, his messages clearly fit this criterion. Nevertheless, the lawsuit argues that Parler’s actions were solely motivated by his support for Trump. Launched in 2018 as a refuge for conservatives, Parler was backed by Mercer, a prominent supporter of Trump’s political endeavors.
Smocks is no stranger to the legal system, with 17 convictions since the age of 18, many related to impersonating military or law enforcement personnel. His Parler username, “Colonel007,” was misleading, as he has never held that military rank (or been associated with James Bond). During his trial concerning his January 6th threats, Smocks, who is Black, claimed that he faced harsher treatment due to his race. Judge Tanya S. Chutkan, who is also Black, characterized these allegations as “offensive” during the sentencing, highlighting the complexities of race and justice in America.
Parler served as one of several online platforms for insurrectionists and domestic terrorists who plotted the January 6th attack on the Capitol. Data from the app, which included GPS tags, revealed Parler’s members breaching the Capitol Building. The platform was reportedly concerned about these events and alerted the FBI over 50 times prior to the riot. However, this proactive approach did not shield the app from post-insurrection repercussions, as Parler faced legal challenges and was briefly removed from the Apple and Google app stores for failing to manage its platform effectively.
This situation marks another unusual chapter in the history of an app that has garnered disproportionate attention relative to its user base. Recently, Parler was acquired by a conservative media company, which took the app offline to reassess its business strategy. Unlike its previous owners, Parler’s new owner Ryan Coyne expressed a desire to operate a successful technology company rather than a political advocacy group. How this shift in focus will resonate with dedicated conservative users remains to be seen.
For a brief period, Parler was a favorite among conservatives, attracting users from Sen. Ted Cruz and Alex Jones to extremist groups like the Proud Boys and the Atomwaffen Division, a neo-Nazi domestic terrorist organization. However, following the fallout from January 6th, Parler fell behind other conservative social media competitors, including Donald Trump’s Truth Social. In 2022, rapper Ye (formerly known as Kanye West) announced he would purchase the beleaguered platform, but Parler canceled the deal on the same day Ye expressed admiration for Hitler during an interview. By January 2023, Parler had laid off nearly all of its employees, illustrating the platform’s tumultuous journey.
