The First Amendment protects the people’s right to free speech from government excess and overreach; the right to free speech concerns solely the relationship between government and those governed, not between or among private persons and private entities, such as social media.
Private social media cannot ‘violate’ anyone’s free speech – only government has the potential of doing so.
Laws and measures enacted by government forcing social media to allow participation don’t ‘protect’ anyone’s ‘free speech’ because social media are incapable of ‘violating’ free speech to begin with; such measures violate social medias’ First Amendment right to freedom of association.
You should talk to a lawyer someday...
The tech fascists operate under the guise of public access. If they want to be publishers, they may. However under the protections of public access, they are compelled to provide an equal platform governed by stated guidelines.
The tech fascists don't, as we know - they promote the Reich and silence any and all opposition to your Reich. In doing so they violate the law and must lose all protections granted under section 230.
Under section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, tech platforms have immunity from lawsuits arising out of their decisions to host (or not to to host) user-generated content. Unlike publishers, which are liable if their writers defame someone, a tech platform is not held liable for content created by its users.
Look, you know nothing of law or the application of law, but if the tech fascists want to promote the Reich, then they are publishers like WaPo and the NY Times.