Federal Court Smacks Down Social Media Platform Censorship

[McRocket]

Seems like we have some "conservatives in name only." They applaud federal regulations of private enterprise and free speech.

EXACTLY!!!

[McRocket]

Those private enterprises are restricting the Constitutional rights of American citizens. Suppose Walmart said they were not going to hire Blacks. Would that be OK because they are private enterprise?

The First Amendment, right of free speech is about: that governments may not restrict their citizens to the right to freedom of speech...publicly.
It has NOTHING to do with the private sector.

Are you seriously suggesting that no one can ever be banned from ANY, form of social media because it violates their 'constitutional rights'?


So, can this forum (which is social media) NEVER ban anyone because that would be robbing the person of their constitutional rights?
Yes or no, please?

[Flash]

OK what if Walmart would not hire you if you own a gun? Would that be constitutional?

It would have nothing to do with the Constitution; it wouldn't be constitutional or unconstitutional.

There are no provisions in the Constitution dealing with private entities. Free press and free religion are protected against governmental restrictions. Only government can commit an unconstitutional act.

[Poor Richard Saunders]

THE JUDGE DISAGREED.


CAN'T READ?


"Federal Judge Andrew S. Oldham of the Fifth Circuit said the platforms argued for “a rather odd inversion of the First Amendment” that “buried somewhere in the person’s enumerated right to free speech lies a corporation’s unenumerated right to muzzle speech.”


YOU LOSE.

This means I can come to your place of business and shout all I want about how you are a murderer and you can't do anything to stop me because it would violate my 1st amendment rights under this ruling.

[Poor Richard Saunders]

Nonsense the overall reversal rate for ALL the appeals courts is 71% and the 5th is 72%. The liberal 6th and 9th courts of appeal have the highest rate of being overturned by SCOTUS.





.

Hmm.. You seem to not understand that the reason the higher court takes a case is because they will likely reverse it. No real reason to take the case if it is going to be upheld.

In 2021-2022, the 9th circuit had 3542 written rulings. 12 were overturned on appeal.

[Grokmaster]

This means I can come to your place of business and shout all I want about how you are a murderer and you can't do anything to stop me because it would violate my 1st amendment rights under this ruling.

I can refuse entry into my business to anyone. Not the same as media platforms deciding they get top block political speech they do not like.

[Grokmaster]

Hmm.. You seem to not understand that the reason the higher court takes a case is because they will likely reverse it. No real reason to take the case if it is going to be upheld.

In 2021-2022, the 9th circuit had 3542 written rulings. 12 were overturned on appeal.

THE 9th is the MOST REVERSED COURT, BY FAR.


Politifact fact-check: the Ninth Circuit is, in fact, the most reversed federal court of appeals





https://excessofdemocracy.com/blog/2...urt-of-appeals

[Poor Richard Saunders]

I can refuse entry into my business to anyone. Not the same as media platforms deciding they get top block political speech they do not like.

Why do you get to refuse entry to anyone but other businesses can't? Are you more equal than they are?

A media platform is no different than a physical business. Can I stand outside your business and use a bullhorn to reach everyone in your business and tell them of all the crimes you are committing? Would any attempt to stop me be a violation of my first amendment rights? If I can stand outside then why can't I come into your business?

[Poor Richard Saunders]

THE 9th is the MOST REVERSED COURT, BY FAR.


Politifact fact-check: the Ninth Circuit is, in fact, the most reversed federal court of appeals

Leave it to you to think that there are only 3 appeals courts and they are called the 6th, the 9th, and the 11th. In 2021, seven court districts had 100% of the cases appealed to and heard by the USSC overturned. In 2020, seven court districts had 100% of their cases heard overturned on appeal.

https://ballotpedia.org/SCOTUS_case_...007_-_Present)

[NiftyNiblick]

Why should privately owned media be forced to give anybody access to their fora?
Free speech is great, but use your own soapbox.

The really pathetic ones are the ones who consider social media to be a valid source of information.
It's never been more than a place to make silent noise,
and it never will be anything other than that.

[Hawkeye10]

Recommended:

[Into the Night]

It seems that the 1st Amendment DOES NOT include the right of large media platforms to censor based on viewpoint. The SELECTIVE BLOCKING OF NON-WOKE/CONSERVATIVE VIEWS IS NOT "OK" UNDER THE 1st AMENDMENT.

America is slowly, but surely , righting its ship.






Federal Court Hand Downs Major Ruling Against Facebook — Big Tech Has No ‘Freewheeling First Amendment Right to Censor’



Censorship on social media may finally come to an end thanks to a law in Texas that was upheld by a federal appeals court.

In Texas, Governor Greg Abbot signed a bill called HB 20 that stops social media platforms with more than 50 million monthly users from censoring or limiting users’ speech based on viewpoint expression.

The new law includes Google, Facebook and Twitter. Predictably, left-wing big tech companies aren’t happy about this Texas law as they are fighting back.

Federal Judge Andrew S. Oldham of the Fifth Circuit said the platforms argued for “a rather odd inversion of the First Amendment” that “buried somewhere in the person’s enumerated right to free speech lies a corporation’s unenumerated right to muzzle speech.”

Republicans say this latest ruling is a major victory that may result in more free speech and the end of censorship on social media platforms. The ongoing legal battle could end up at the Supreme Court, which holds a conservative majority.












https://www.analyzingamerica.org/202...m_source=mcotr

The 1st amendment does not apply to anything but the federal government. No court has authority to change the Constitution.
As to the authority of Texas to pass such a law, they do have that authority, but only in the State of Texas.

[Into the Night]

I bet Facebook will block accounts from Texas.

Meh. If they want to get sued to death they can go there.

[Into the Night]

I was reading that a different court of the same weight ruled the other way....we will see how the courts shake out but given that they fail me and the Constitution much/most of the time I dont have high hopes.

The 1st amendment does not apply to anything but the federal government.

[Into the Night]

This means I can come to your place of business and shout all I want about how you are a murderer and you can't do anything to stop me because it would violate my 1st amendment rights under this ruling.

He can. He doesn't need any constitution do so either. Most States already have laws about this. They have the authority to pass and enforce such laws.