[TulliusCicero]

> Other individuals and corporations have many rights with respect to other individuals and corporations that are not shared with the government.

Agreed, and those are written in things other than the First Amendment.

What were we discussing, again?

> Part of the question before the court is the extent to which social media is closer to a government controlled space or context or a private publication.

Which is patently absurd. There are some grey areas for the First Amendment, but "is a private corporation actually the government?" isn't one of them. That's extremely black and white. Republicans arguing otherwise just don't like that some corporations have at least attempted to moderate hateful speech and misinformation.

Now, maybe if tech platforms had been granted a monopoly by the government, like some utilities, then sure, but that's not the case here.

[PaulDavisThe1st]

> What were we discussing, again?

Whether (a) corporations can interfere with individual free speech (b) the constitution contains actual text that says so (one way or another)

Some GGGP or something claims that

> Private companies can't violate an individual's First Amendment rights. Only governments can.

to which a child comment claims

> It's not just precedent, it's written into the Constitution.

[TulliusCicero]

Right, and so far we've seen that's true, despite your various tangents about related but distinct issues. Glad that's settled.

[PaulDavisThe1st]

Mmmmm-Hmmmmm.