The First Amendment protects citizen’s speech , not the Big Tech platforms who interfere with that speech. Contrary to what they claim, the platforms run on their user’s private property.
Re: NetChoice v. Paxton
● The Platforms cannot Claim First Amendment Protection for Their Conduct on Consumers’ Property, including Consumers’ Content and Private Information
● The Platforms are Consumer Services Providers, not Speakers
● Physical Access to Consumers’ Speech is NOT Permission to Editorialize
● The Platforms’ Terms of Service are Invalid
● The Platforms are NOT Even “Like Media”
● The Platforms are NOT Authorized to Access Consumers’ Computers for Editorializing
● The Platforms’ Apps are Physically Installed on Consumers’ Smartphones
● The Platforms are NOT Granted Copyright License for Editorializing
● The Platforms are contractors for the Texas government, which has multiple accounts with them. Texas has the right and obligation to protect its residents, interacting with these accounts, against discrimination by the platforms.
SCOTUS-Platforms-v-Texas–Argument2 contains a more complete argument.
Originally published on 2022-06-02. Updated on 2022-06-08.