Sometimes making Democrats play by their own rules requires ensuring even their dumbest moves are countered.

You may recall a recent court decision barring Donald Trump from blocking people on Twitter, because apparently a government official is stifling the first amendment if he blocks vulgar trolls or something. None of it really made sense, yet it was pursued anyway and trumpeted as a great victory on the left.

Here’s a media report on that case from back in the summer from The Hill.

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday ruled that President Trump cannot block Twitter users from his official account, finding that the practice is discriminatory.

The ruling upholds a lower court ruling that also found Trump cannot block the Twitter users.

The president uses his Twitter account to make announcements, from personnel changes within his administration to the implementation of new policies.

The judges wrote “that the First Amendment does not permit a public official who utilizes a social media account for all manner of official purposes to exclude persons from an otherwise-open online dialogue because they expressed views with which the official disagrees.”

Notice the broadness of the judge’s assertion that “public officials” who use social media for official purposes can not block people from seeing what they are saying.

Democrats, who simply assume they don’t have to play by the rules they sought to invent, have largely ignored this edict. In the case of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, one of her constituents decided to press the issue though. I wrote about the judge overseeing the case demanding AOC testify a few months ago.

Now, Dov Hikind has won his case, or at least he’s forced the settlement he wanted all along.

Not only does AOC have to unblock him, she had to apologize as well.

For context, today was the day she would have been forced to testify in court and defend her hypocrisy on this matter (she was very much in support of Trump being unable to block people). It seems she got cold feet and decided to fold, no doubt counting on the fact that the mainstream media won’t report this story. Who can blame her for making such an assumption?

Honestly, this entire thing is ridiculous. Anyone should be able to block anyone they want on a privately owned social media network. In fact, I’ve been assured by other conservatives that these private platforms exist under no semblance of the first amendment. Given that, why does a federal judge have any say in who Donald Trump or AOC blocks? The right answer is that they shouldn’t.

But these are their new rules and they will be made to live by them.

I’ve got a new twitter! Please help by following @bonchieredstate.