Legislation consultants: 1st Modification would not defend president’s place on social media | Native Information
Cries from free speech advocates protesting the ban on President Donald Trump’s Twitter account and similar actions by Facebook, Amazon and Google reveal a misunderstanding of the first amendment to the constitution, legal experts said Monday.
The decisions social media companies have made over the past week aren’t limited by the first change, said Scott Meinke, professor and chairman of the political science division at Bucknell.
The first change is about what the government can’t do, he said.
“The clause on freedom of expression prevents the government from restricting freedom of expression,” said Meinke. “It does not guarantee individuals access to privately owned platforms for speech. And it does not protect individuals from negative consequences for the private sector that could result from their utterance.”
Meinke agrees with Stanley Brand, a distinguished legal and government member of Penn State University. “The first change is part of protecting the Bill of Rights from government restrictions on freedom of expression,” he said.
Twitter and the other social media platforms are commercial companies, Brand said, “and they have the right to conduct their business as they see fit. There is certainly no constitutional law that anyone can access.”
That doesn’t remove the controversy over whether that’s a good idea or a bad idea, Brand noted. “And when these things happen, it puts pressure on the legal structure to look for ways and remedies. However, given the application of the First Amendment by the Supreme Court, this is not possible.”
What has fueled all of this, Brand said, “is an examination of the major tech media on a broader basis. That is, do they have too much power and control over the market? There have already been movements in Congress from both sides of the aisle.” under the heading of antitrust laws to check whether Big Tech has too much monopoly power in the market. “
When people realize they are going to run into a wall under the First Amendment, Brand said, “They will immediately go to the antitrust area and claim that the companies are anti-competitive.”
The power of big tech
As a private company, US Congressman Fred Keller, R-12, told Kreamer, “Twitter has the power to decide who it offers services to. However, in making that decision, Twitter must apply its regulatory standards equally to all users it offers.” doesn’t seem to be doing. “
It is absurd that Twitter has suspended President Trump’s account, Keller said, “but not the account of the Iranian Ayatollah Khamenei, the head of the world’s leading state sponsor of terror. Big Tech is setting a dangerous precedent with the displacement of the President of the United States must be held accountable. ”
Khamenei is the supreme leader of Iran.
“Denying the waves of communication based on political opinion is a page from George Orwell’s 1984,” added US Congressman Dan Meuser, R-9, Dallas. “Even the ACLU said it should affect everyone when uncontrolled power removes the voice of individuals.” .
“To bring the country together, we need more dialogue and freedom of expression, not less,” said Meuser. “These left-wing actions are doing nothing other than dividing America further.”
It is time to show some respect to all Americans, Meuser said.
“In the last few weeks of the campaign, it was evident that many media outlets were completely ignoring or closing any reference to Hunter Biden’s story,” he said. “If people can’t see this tendency that big outlets have given one party preferential treatment over another, then they’re not looking hard enough.”