X is funding a lawsuit filed by Chloe Happe against her former employer, Block | Mashable.

X is funding a lawsuit filed by Chloe Happe against her former employer, Block.

Free speech?
By Matthews Martins on 
Elon Musk's X funds lawsuit against Jack Dorsey's Block Credit: Photo by KIRILL KUDRYAVTSEV/AFP via Getty Images)

Elon Musk has a lot of money. He also owns a couple of companies that have a lot of money. One of those companies, X, is using some of its money to fund yet another lawsuit.

The lawsuit was filed by Chloe Happe against her former employer Block — yes, the Block that was founded by Jack Dorsey, the person who founded X back when it was Twitter. The tech world is just one interconnected web not unlike The Chart in The L Word.

In the complaint, Happe accused Block of firing her for making two posts on X in her personal time: One in which she purported to be a citizen of Kurdistan and referenced refugees fleeing Gaza in the aftermath of the October 7 Hamas attacks, and another in which she used ableist language and slurs against trans people in reference to gender neutral restrooms. Both were made from pseudonymous accounts.

The lawsuit alleges that she was unlawfully terminated in violation of Block's own employee speech policy and "several constitutionally protected freedoms, including the freedom of thought, the freedom of belief, the freedom of speech, and the freedom of expressive association" because neither post mentioned Block, she posted both of them during her personal time, and she "voluntarily deleted" both posts within days of posting them.

According to the lawsuit, human resources at Block said it received reports about Happe's posts. When Block obtained the deleted posts and showed them to Happe, she denied making them and "claimed an abusive ex-boyfriend must have impersonated her online." A few days later, Block fired Happe. She is claiming that Block terminated her without severance solely because she "expressed her political views, opinions, or beliefs in the form of satire" that Block disagreed with.

"X is funding a lawsuit filed today by Chloe Happe against her former employer, Block," X's account posted on X. "Block fired Chloe because of the political opinions she expressed on X. Chloe had two pseudonymous accounts on X, @bronzeageshawty and the now-deprecated @samsarashawty. She did not reference Block or her own identity on either account before Block fired her. But because some of the opinions she expressed in her X accounts did not conform to the prevailing political orthodoxy, Block fired her, in violation of the law.  X is supporting her suit to vindicate her rights."

Happe wants her job back and to be compensated for loss of pay. Block has not released a public statement about the lawsuit and did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Mashable.

Topics  Twitter Elon Musk

Comments

  1. Since most companies can fire you for no reason, not sure she's going to have much of an argument.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. she's from Missouri which is an at will state. She will lose on that alone. She also clearly says ADA in her posts which is clearly hate speech. He's only doing this because it's Jack's company and he's got fu money. It's also not covered by 1st ammendment due to both x and block being private companies.

      Delete
  2. When social media is the new government? Interesting takes on "free speech".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Her hate speech on a public platform shinned a spotlight on how horrible of a person they had on their payroll. Her company exercised their free speech to say "you're fired".

      Delete
  3. I dont know what I just read. X Block Twitter ...

    ReplyDelete
  4. It seems it could be argued that she was fired for lying after denying she posted the tweets in question and made up a story about her ex hijacking her accounts and posting them I her name 🤔🤷🏼‍♂️

    ReplyDelete
  5. fired for pollitical views?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. she said nothing political. It was pure hate speech.

      Delete
    2. hate speech is quite arbitrary category.

      Delete
    3. no, there's pretty defined laws in the US as to what qualifies. Calling out the ADA specifically definitely qualifies.

      Delete
    4. so calling someone retarded is now punishable by law? I heard you can serve lifetime in prison in canada soon, way to go.

      Delete
    5. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    6. that's not how anything works in Canada

      Delete
  6. #ApartheidClyde doesn’t care.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I Am going to Positively change the lives of 1st five people to write me with the word “GOD IS WITH ME” let’s end inhumanity 🇺🇸🇨🇦💯

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Click Here To Join The real Elon Musk verified Private Telegram account
      👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇https://t.me/ELON_MUSK_0_04

      Delete
  8. Free speech on X
    #technology

    ReplyDelete
  9. Elon Musk has basically turned into a caricature of a comic book villain, like Lex Luthor, or one of those Bond villains

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I entirely agree, but imagine if Lex Luthor started doing ketamine.

      Delete
  10. Good.
    If she'd been fired for sharing some progressive nonsense, Mashable would probably be funding her lawsuit, along with the ACLU and other humourless leftist dullards.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah. I feel you, man. Heaven forbid we should ever be progressive.

      What do you think that means by the way?

      Delete
    2. 'progressive' implies a belief that a particular set of ideas is 'progress' and anything that isn't deemed "progressive" must be either stagnant or regressive.
      It's arrogance though to slap a 'superior' label on your ideas that you and your ideas are superior to others.
      Because that's essentially the delusions of grandeur that so-called "progressives" believe themselves to be.

      Delete
    3. Could you give me an example of an idea that you consider valid that progressives would consider stagnant or regressive?

      I'm honestly curious.

      Delete
    4. anything post WWI is #WOKE
      #teslafanboyscertified

      Delete
    5. WW1 was very woke. Imagine being so progressive you cared about Frans Ferdinand. He was a lesbian communist with no respect for are flag of Saint George of Asda.

      Delete
    6. in hindsight, the Greeks were bi too. Ergo, #WOKE

      I guess anything post Cro-Magnon is #WOKE

      #teslafanboyscertified

      Delete
    7. Must be another MAGAT that just plain loves and worships egomaniacs.

      Delete
  11. Free hate speech that revs up hate actions that divides our country more.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Republicans don’t believe in Freedom of Speech. They want the Freedom to lie with zero consequences. And they believe that exposing their lies goes against Freedom of Speech they are too stupid to realize that exposing the lies is also freedom of speech.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. freedom implies free of shackles. No restrictions.

      Delete
  13. Hello, Are you in need of any financial assistance? Message with “support me” I will assist you with 10k.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Block is jack company, founder of Twitter.

    This is juicy.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Good for her. Hope she wins.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Block (formally known as Square?)

    ReplyDelete
  17. Crazy how that’s a Jack Dorsey company

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That’s exactly why it’s happening it’s a calculated hilarious chess move lmao

      Delete
    2. Twitter throwing his money away on a lawsuit that’s guaranteed to lose is a calculated chess move? Lol ok

      Delete
    3. it's not a calculated chess move, Elon is just bitter and spiteful because Dorsey was the one who talked him into the idea of buying twitter. And then he tried to back out once he realized he overbid, and got stuck w what will end up a $30 billion loss because he's a moron lmao

      Delete
    4. I think it’s just another move by Elon to oppose the woke agenda

      Delete
    5. i gotcha, we disagree on this. but thanks for answering

      Delete
    6. on the merits of the legal case: it will
      not succeed. elon seems unnecessarily cruel to trans people considering his daughter is

      Delete
    7. I mean fair enough I am not an Elon fanboy just think he’s objectively interesting and entertaining in regards to how he operates throughout life, this video came to mind in the context of this debacle
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8Nf56srwcA

      Delete
    8. apologies that is too long for me to watch the full episode right now. all i know is that he overbid and tried to back out and the delaware court of chancery was about to legally compel his purchase so he went though with it

      Delete
    9. the market was tanking and he was desperate to get out of the deal but the board of twitter called his bluff and took their lucrative payouts and left him with a revenue negative company

      Delete
    10. sorry if i'm not addressing your points

      Delete
    11. Fair enough yeah there’s a lot of ways to look at it, but maybe watch that when you have a bit it’s only 15 mins

      Delete
    12. cool will give it a go 👍

      Delete
  18. I hope she wins.

    ReplyDelete
  19. This is all too familiar

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah it’s called at will employment.

      Delete
    2. LMAO not when it suppresses your 1st amendment rights of free speech. If she has the evidence that company could liable for millions in damages. Hopefully she wins big so companies learn you want to fafo then you will pay for doing so. Its illegal to infringe one 1st amndt rights

      Delete
    3. you really don't understand the first amendment if you think it applies to posts on twitter!

      Delete
  20. This is going to be interesting.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I hope she gets PAID !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  22. Which "political opinions" exactly?

    ReplyDelete
  23. Bullish on $EGIRL

    ReplyDelete
  24. Praying for a blessed day for everyone reading this 🙏 ❤️

    ReplyDelete
  25. That’s great! Btw, so it is officially okay by X to have more than one account?

    ReplyDelete
  26. I'd fire her too if she called out a worker like that. Horrible.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Does this company operate in a right to work state? If so, she’s probably out of luck.

    ReplyDelete
  28. chloeeeee hahhahaha

    ReplyDelete
  29. Do we have any context on what she said I’m curious.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Isnt this free speech against employer? I have the right to fire anyone as an employer? if an employee of mine is seeming to displaying bigoted opinions, my clients could leave me and i dont want to take that risk etc…

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "seeming to displaying bigoted opinions"

      Who cares what you think is, and isn't, a "bigoted opinion"?

      Please let everyone know the name of your company.

      Just so everyone who loves free speech can make sure never to become one of your employees.

      Delete
    2. My company my choice ? Why free speech only for employees?

      Delete
    3. How about we pass a new "hate" crime law that takes away your company and all its assets if someone takes offence to any posts you have made on social media?

      If you want to take away the right of your employees and deprive them of their livelihood that would only be fair.

      Delete
  31. X is now replacing the @ACLU as the fighter of free speech.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. fighter OF or FOR free speech?

      Delete
  32. Free speech applies to everyone not just the political opinions of people X align themselves with…

    ReplyDelete
  33. What a strange cause it is not clear to me if it is a cause of work or simply a cause of slander

    ReplyDelete
  34. Wow. A company doing this to its workers, is not a company that deserves to thrive.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Interesting.. I was fired at my job because of my opinion of the jab and "peaceful protests" that happened in 2020. By the way so many people have died that got the jab that no one will ever convince me that it is safe. It is effective though in killing people and making them infertile.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Eventually everyone who got the jab will die, it's wild

      Delete
  36. Start a GiveSendGo!

    ReplyDelete
  37. How did they find out her actual identity?

    ReplyDelete
  38. There must be freedom of Speech on #X..

    ReplyDelete
  39. From her posts, she is blaming X. She is saying X ruined her life and that she will never find a husband. She also said she is moving back to Kazitskan.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. She ruined her life. And, Kazakhstan can have her.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Stay informed!