"President Trump has been violating the Constitution by blocking people from following his Twitter account because they criticized or mocked him, a federal appeals court ruled on Tuesday. The ruling could have broader implications for how the First Amendment applies to the social-media era."
How is Twitter not in the same violation? If they are selectively, and purposely banning certain people/speech, they are no longer just a platform.
No, because Trump is the government; Twitter is a private company. The First Amendment only prohibits government from censoring speech.
Fair enough, however this part of the article always stuck with me:
They've prevented anyone from reading his posts now. Seems like that's the same violation.
I understand 203 and private company, just found it very thin line.
Trump is speaker - Twitter is “platform” (per 230) - so, no.
"President Trump has been violating the Constitution by blocking people from following his Twitter account because they criticized or mocked him, a federal appeals court ruled on Tuesday. The ruling could have broader implications for how the First Amendment applies to the social-media era."
How is Twitter not in the same violation? If they are selectively, and purposely banning certain people/speech, they are no longer just a platform.
I know they arent a platform - but they have been classified as such. That is the difference. Should they be classified as such? Obviously not.