[throwawaygh]

> This is a open and shut first amendment case.

Yes, it is, but the outcome would be the opposite of what you expect.

constitutionally, private corporations can't be censored or compelled to speak when the speech is 1A protected speech.

but not all speech receives 1A protections, and Section 230 is about the type of speech that isn't protected by 1A. E.g., without 230, corporations could be sued for users' libel or held criminally liable for helping distribute lots of different types of speech (e.g., making terroristic threats, distributing child porn, facilitating illegal acts, etc.).

So, a case that hinges on 230 protections would be open-and-shut if 230 were repealed. Just with the opposite outcome of the one you're expecting.