Private Industry Can Not Abridge Freedom of Speech

[bettwice33]

The first few words of the First Amendment are "Congress shall make no law." It in itself does not place restrictions on anyone but Congress.

Congress is our law making body. Nobody else is authorized to make laws, especially not Mark Zuckerberg or Jack Dorsey.

 

[WinterBorn]

The Bill of Rights was written to protect the people's rights from gov't infringement. Private property is still private property. You are welcome to scream obscenities from the street. But when you come on to my property, I have a say.

 

[BlindBoo]

The first few words of the First Amendment are "Congress shall make no law." It in itself does not place restrictions on anyone but Congress.

Congress is our law making body. Nobody else is authorized to make laws, especially not Mark Zuckerberg or Jack Dorsey.

The Bill of rights constrains Congress and constrains the media very little.

 

[bettwice33]

The Bill of Rights was written to protect the people's rights from gov't infringement. Private property is still private property. You are welcome to scream obscenities from the street. But when you come on to my property, I have a say.

The internet is a public place.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

This is simple. Congress is the lawmaking body. Judges can not make laws. Facebook, Twitter and YouTube can not make laws. As the lawmaking body, Congress has not amended the 1st amendment to say that private industry can abridge freedom of speech. Since we the people stand above all of our enemy, public servant judges as the highest authorities, we can exercise our authority and fire every judge in the country for violating the 1st amendment by allowing any sort of censorship.
The catch here is that we have to form an organization of we the people that's large enough to compel our cops to arrest the judges or they will protect the judges.
There is no penalty in the Constitution for judges violating it. We have to rewrite it and add in some penalties.
Public opinion can also force the judges to stop Facebook, YouTube, Twittter and anyone else from violating the 1st amendment. So talk about this.

This is comprehensively ignorant, ridiculous, and wrong.

Congress alone cannot ‘amend’ the Constitution.

Constitutional amendments cannot be ‘amended’ – only repealed.

Only government has the potential to violate free speech, not private entities such as social media.

As private publishers, social media are at liberty to edit content as they see fit – where how that content might be edited in no manner ‘violates’ free speech.

The courts have no authority to dictate to private social media how to edit their content; indeed, by doing so, judges would be in violation of the First Amendment and freedom of the press.

The courts can rule only on government actions because government alone is subject to First Amendment case law.

Last, as private entities, social media enjoy the right of freedom of association; in addition to being at liberty to edit as they see fit, they are also at liberty to determine who will be allowed to be a member and who may participate.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The social media are private businesses which can choose the way how their operate their property. So called conservatives here defended a private bakery for not serving a gay couple, because the owners couldn't serve them basing on their principles. But at the same time, they dismiss the right of other private businesses to do the same. That is quite strange, isnt it?

Facebook, Twitter and YouTube all banned me for citing the Declaration of Independence. Let's skip the gay agenda and talk about genuine problems.

Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube are at complete liberty to ban you for whatever reason – don’t like it, find somewhere else to go or abide by the TOS.

‘Problem’ solved.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The Bill of Rights was written to protect the people's rights from gov't infringement. Private property is still private property. You are welcome to scream obscenities from the street. But when you come on to my property, I have a say.

The internet is a public place.

But it’s not government – it’s not subject to the doctrine of free speech or First Amendment case law as is government.

 

[Esdraelon]

Congress has not amended the 1st amendment to say that private industry can abridge freedom of speech.

Who owned the press in those days? Private industry.

Did anyone own all of the soap boxes?

Printing presses were expensive. They were free to be as partisan as they liked. Still are.

Would our Founders have said that our enemies could own all of the TV networks if they had foreseen TV?

You are free to set up your own outlet. Nobody is stopping you. God bless America !

Yes, indeed and hundreds of entrepreneurs are doing just that. What will you say when the thugs in DC begin censoring or shutting those "independents" down. I'd bet the farm that Leftists will make excuses for why it has to be done. Hypocrites...

 

[Esdraelon]

The social media are private businesses which can choose the way how their operate their property. So called conservatives here defended a private bakery for not serving a gay couple, because the owners couldn't serve them basing on their principles. But at the same time, they dismiss the right of other private businesses to do the same. That is quite strange, isnt it?

Facebook, Twitter and YouTube all banned me for citing the Declaration of Independence. Let's skip the gay agenda and talk about genuine problems.

Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube are at complete liberty to ban you for whatever reason – don’t like it, find somewhere else to go or abide by the TOS.

‘Problem’ solved.

Yep, that's why I closed all those accounts. There are plenty of moderate and conservative voices out there who are untouchable by the data barons UNLESS DC decides to go full Nazi.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Congress has not amended the 1st amendment to say that private industry can abridge freedom of speech.

Who owned the press in those days? Private industry.

Did anyone own all of the soap boxes?

Printing presses were expensive. They were free to be as partisan as they liked. Still are.

Would our Founders have said that our enemies could own all of the TV networks if they had foreseen TV?

You are free to set up your own outlet. Nobody is stopping you. God bless America !

Yes, indeed and hundreds of entrepreneurs are doing just that. What will you say when the thugs in DC begin censoring or shutting those "independents" down. I'd bet the farm that Leftists will make excuses for why it has to be done. Hypocrites...

Stop being a victim. You have a losers mentality.

 

[Pellinore]

I figure that right now we're about where we were with factories and industry about 120 years ago; technology moves more quickly than law does, so they're getting away with a lot until we catch up. I hope we get our act together soon, because I really, really don't want the likes of Mark Zuckerberg to decide what speech is protected and what isn't.

 

[bettwice33]

The Bill of Rights was written to protect the people's rights from gov't infringement. Private property is still private property. You are welcome to scream obscenities from the street. But when you come on to my property, I have a say.

The internet is a public place.

But it’s not government – it’s not subject to the doctrine of free speech or First Amendment case law as is government.

This is why we barred all attorneys from our government. The SCOTUS is way beyond corrupt.