What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Why does it not violate the first ammendment for the White House and FBI tell social media platforms who to ban?

struth

Diamond Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2021
Messages
29,250
Reaction score
17,457
Points
1,288
That’s an entirely different component of stat action doctrine which has nothing to do with Marsh v Alabama.

You need to show social media companies are being compelled by the government. That isn’t happening.
haha of course it is…when xiden admin meets with them and tells them what to publish
The government has free speech too. They can tell anyone to do anything or face whatever consequences they can legally bring to bear. You really don't have to like it but that's how it is. The government can absolutely pressure social media companies to clean up their acts in the name of the public good.
no…the govt can’t tell a person or company what to say

that’s what we have the first amendment
 

Marener

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2022
Messages
6,103
Reaction score
2,741
Points
163
They cooperated, of course, because they are prog douchebags. However, the government violated the First Amendment by colluding with them.
If there was no force, the premise and title of your article is a lie.
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
159,494
Reaction score
41,661
Points
2,180
If there was no force, the premise and title of your article is a lie.
It used tax money which is obtained by force, asshole.
 

Marener

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2022
Messages
6,103
Reaction score
2,741
Points
163
haha of course it is…when xiden admin meets with them and tells them what to publish
Still looking for how they compelled them. Without evidence of that, you have nothing.

Just like how Trump had nothing when he argued this aspect before a judge in his lawsuit with Twitter.

It’s embarrassing you don’t understand your own profession. You’re a terrible lawyer.
 

dblack

Diamond Member
Joined
May 21, 2011
Messages
47,137
Reaction score
9,857
Points
2,030
Regulating corporations is entirely coercive because they never willingly walk away from a profit no matter how dirty or exploitative.
They last bit is just a marxist slur, but yeah - regulation is coercive. An application of state force. So is threatening legislation unless companies do as they're told.
 

struth

Diamond Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2021
Messages
29,250
Reaction score
17,457
Points
1,288
Still looking for how they compelled them. Without evidence of that, you have nothing.

Just like how Trump had nothing when he argued this aspect before a judge in his lawsuit with Twitter.

It’s embarrassing you don’t understand your own profession. You’re a terrible lawyer.
um the meetings with them, when they told them what to allow being published

moreover trump still has two other open cases against twitter
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
159,494
Reaction score
41,661
Points
2,180
They last bit is just a marxist slur, but yeah - regulation is coercive. An application of state force. So is threatening legislation unless companies do as they're told.
The fact that they spent time doing it on the taxpayer's dime is coercive.
 

dblack

Diamond Member
Joined
May 21, 2011
Messages
47,137
Reaction score
9,857
Points
2,030
The fact that they spent time doing it on the taxpayer's dime is coercive.
Yep, it's no different than proposing to revoke 230 unless Twitter unbans Trump.

This is why we're so screwed. Both sides are pushing us toward fascism. It's just a question of who gets there first.
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
159,494
Reaction score
41,661
Points
2,180
This argument makes no sense.

Social media companies aren’t forced to do anything by the government.

Don’t be such a moron.
The government is colluding with social media on the taxpayer's dime to censor Americans. Taxes are obtained by force.

What part are you too fucking stupid to understand?
 

struth

Diamond Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2021
Messages
29,250
Reaction score
17,457
Points
1,288
This argument makes no sense.

Social media companies aren’t forced to do anything by the government.

Don’t be such a moron.
of course they are forced to pay taxes

geez try not paying taxes
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
159,494
Reaction score
41,661
Points
2,180
And what would happen if social media companies didn’t do so?
That doesn't matter. Simply discussing the matter with them is a violation of the First Amendment.
 

Blues Man

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2016
Messages
24,382
Reaction score
9,527
Points
490

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
159,494
Reaction score
41,661
Points
2,180
OOOHHHH a whole hour
He still has to work around the ban rather than just using Facebook like everyone else.

It's always hilarious whenever progs get into this head in the sand mode.
 

💲 Amazon Deals 💲

New Topics

Forum List

Top