Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

applegrove

(132,217 posts)
Thu May 12, 2022, 11:26 PM May 2022

Two GOP judges just stripped social media companies of basic First Amendment rights

Two GOP judges just stripped social media companies of basic First Amendment rights

(Changed article source on this topic)

The First Amendment doesn’t apply to Republicans anymore?

By Ian Millhiser  May 12, 2022, 3:00pm EDT

https://www.vox.com/2022/5/12/23068017/supreme-court-first-amendment-twitter-facebook-youtube-instagram-netchoice-paxton-texas

"SNIP.......

The conservative United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit handed down a brief, unexplained order Wednesday evening that will throw the entire social media industry into turmoil if the Texas law at issue in this case is allowed to remain in effect.

The decision in NetChoice v. Paxton reinstates an unconstitutional Texas law that seizes control of the major social media platforms’ content moderation process, requiring them to either carry content that those platforms do not wish to publish or be so restrictive it would render the platforms unusable. This law is unconstitutional because the First Amendment prohibits the government from ordering private companies or individuals to publish speech that they do not wish to be associated with.

As the Supreme Court said in Rumsfeld v. Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights (2006), “this Court’s leading First Amendment precedents have established the principle that freedom of speech prohibits the government from telling people what they must say.”

The Texas law prohibits a social media platform “that functionally has more than 50 million active users in the United States in a calendar month” from banning a user — or even from regulating or restricting a user’s content or altering the algorithms that surface content to other users — because of that user’s “viewpoint.”

.......SNIP"

17 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

kelly1mm

(5,756 posts)
4. I am fine with this as companies are not people and don't have rights that natural persons
Fri May 13, 2022, 01:14 AM
May 2022

have. They only have those privileges that the government allows them to have. How much of a crap sandwich have progressives had to eat due to companies being 'persons' in the law (Citizens United ring a bell?)

KS Toronado

(23,727 posts)
7. What these GQP judges are really saying is
Fri May 13, 2022, 01:39 AM
May 2022

we forbid you to interfere with Agolf Twitler & MAGAstanians posting lies & propaganda, and we're not
going to allow you to takeaway reQublicOns 2 greatest tools for reelection ie: lies & propaganda.

 

kelly1mm

(5,756 posts)
10. Again, companies are not persons and have no rights. Period. They only have those
Fri May 13, 2022, 01:51 AM
May 2022

privileges extended by the government. Companies do not have first amendment rights. Only people do. I find it strange that this is controversial on a 'progressive' board like DU?????

Bear Creek

(883 posts)
15. Needs changed
Sun May 15, 2022, 07:52 AM
May 2022

Good luck with that. Corporate owned politicians on both sides will need to be voted out. Changing the laws regarding election money would be a start.

Tommymac

(7,334 posts)
17. The SC says they are people as far as 1st Amendment Rights go. See Citizen United and associates.
Sun May 15, 2022, 09:33 AM
May 2022

You may not agree, but that is your prerogative.

Actually, corporations have been treated as 'individuals' as far as the law is concerned for a long long time - established corporate law goes back into the 19th century, at the least.

Until We The People elect more politicians that are not bound by corporate donations this will never change.

i.e. It will never change.

We have to reestablish or enact legislation in the US to control them and protect REAL people, as right now no government in the world can withstand the cash pressure from billionaires and corporation/cartels who have more $$$ then many countries do.



David__77

(24,728 posts)
13. I agree.
Fri May 13, 2022, 09:06 AM
May 2022

I think regulating that space to create space for speech is totally defensible.

msongs

(73,754 posts)
5. google, facebook, yahoo announce their services will no longer available in texas. that'll do it n
Fri May 13, 2022, 01:15 AM
May 2022

Roy Rolling

(7,632 posts)
9. Wait...
Fri May 13, 2022, 01:48 AM
May 2022

There is a social media company like that—Truth Social.

It’s a failure and why other companies don’t have similar policies—it’s bad for business.

So Republicans want to over-regulate companies into bankruptcy. That’s Trump economics in a nutshell, or, ETTD.

Novara

(6,115 posts)
16. These companies are private and they are not the government
Sun May 15, 2022, 08:51 AM
May 2022

They DO have the right to moderate what is presented in their products. To tell them they can't is unconstitutional.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Two GOP judges just strip...