So how does this fit into the "Twitter is a private company" argument when users complain about their free speech rights after being suspended?
If one's account is suspended they cannot - by definition - access Trump's tweets. This is similar reasoning as that given in court: "comments on the president’s account [are] public forums and that blocking Twitter Inc users for their views violated their right to free speech under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution".
If Twitter suspends someone for their views are they violating free speech under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution?
Obviously there's many ways to interact with Twitter while suspended - similarly there are many ways to read Trump's tweets while blocked.
I don't have a take, I'm just curious as to what this may lead to.
If one's account is suspended they cannot - by definition - access Trump's tweets. This is similar reasoning as that given in court: "comments on the president’s account [are] public forums and that blocking Twitter Inc users for their views violated their right to free speech under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution".
If Twitter suspends someone for their views are they violating free speech under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution?
Obviously there's many ways to interact with Twitter while suspended - similarly there are many ways to read Trump's tweets while blocked.
I don't have a take, I'm just curious as to what this may lead to.