Taylor Swift's Lawyer Reprimanded After Demanding Blogger Removes Article

The blog in question suggests that Swift is an icon of white supremacist and nationalists

MOST POPULAR

Taylor Swift's demand that a blogger remove and retract their article suggesting the singer is an icon of white supremacists has been criticised by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

The organisation reportedly sent the singer's lawyer a strongly worded letter reprimanding the 27-year-old's threat to sue an American blogger who, without evidence, accused the star of supporting the white supremacy movement.

ADVERTISEMENT - CONTINUE READING BELOW

'This is a completely unsupported attempt to suppress constitutionally protected speech,' ACLU of Northern California attorney Michael Risher told Entertainment Weekly.

ACLU attorney Matt Cagle added: 'Intimidation tactics like these are unacceptable.

'Not in her wildest dreams can Ms. Swift use copyright law to suppress this exposure of a threat to constitutionally protected speech.'

The post in question is by PopFront blogger Meghan Herning, and is titled 'Swiftly to the alt-right: Taylor subtly gets the lower case kkk in formation'.

The article claims that Swift's lyrics for Look What You Made Me Do has 'dog whistles to white supremacy', and alleges that the Charlottesville white supremacist rally chant of 'you will not replace us' echoes her lyrics 'I don't like your kingdom keys, they once belonged to me'.

Intimidation tactics like these are unacceptable

ADVERTISEMENT - CONTINUE READING BELOW

While Swift's representatives have yet to respond to the ACLU, her lawyer previously argued against attempts to link Swift to white nationalists after a meme was posted on Pinterest.

In May 2016, the Washington Post reported Swift's lawyer J. Douglas Baldridge, sent Pinterest a letter asking for the images to be removed. It reportedly said, in part:

'The association of Ms. Swift with Adolf Hitler undisputedly is "harmful," "abusive," "ethnically offensive," "humiliating to other people," "libelous," and no doubt otherwise objectionable.

'It is of no import that Ms. Swift may be a public figure or that Pinterest conveniently now argues that the Offending Material is mere satire or parody.

'Public figures have rights. And, there are certain historical figures, such as Adolf Hitler, Charles Manson and the like, who are universally identified in the case law and popular culture as lightning rods for emotional and negative reaction.'

More from ELLE UK: