| ==The Marsh case handles a scenario in which a private company controlled the public space.== and acted as a de-facto government by providing fire, police and other services typically provided by governments. Twitter is not similar, as multiple people have already mentioned. ==Trumps twitter, for example, was ruled as a public resource and therefore he couldn't block users from his feed.== His personal Twitter feed is a public resource. Trump is the government, blocking people is literally the government limiting free speech. Twitter is not the government. ==Would you have the same opinion here if Twitter was banning minorities based on race? Is it still a private company that can do whatever they please?== No, because they are very different, as explained by justice.gov [1]. "Federal laws prohibit discrimination based on a person's national origin, race, color, religion, disability, sex, and familial status." [1] https://www.justice.gov/crt/federal-protections-against-nati... |
Then please explain to me individuals like Sarah Jeong being outwardly racist yet a member of the blue check cadre.
There is clearly a double standard here, and you seem to be in the grouping of individuals that appreciate the oppression when it suits your own interests.