zlacker

Most people not exercising their rights is entirely distinct from people not having been educated on them. The Bill of Rights is surely a required item on every single curriculum in the country. I, having paid attention in high school, am aware that I have no obligation to comply with arbitrary LEO requests, and certainly not those pertaining to the content of speech.

Yes, they did talk of their own volition. As they are free (under their 1st Amendment rights) to do. We have no reason to suspect that they’ve been coerced except for the fact that you disagree with the choice they made! They on the other hand were surely aware of their rights when they chose to talk.

>>ethanb+(OP)
The problem is not the rights of Twitter employees, it's the right of the people banned...

>>TeeMas+m7
What? They have no “rights” to use Twitter. This is also not even remotely controversial.

Or put another way: the government cannot coerce Twitter or any other platform to carry someone else’s speech.

Note however the government is free to ask Twitter to carry people’s speech, as Trump did almost daily for 4+ years whining about so and so getting banned or de-boosted etc.

>>ethanb+Ga
> What? They have no “rights” to use Twitter. This is also not even remotely controversial.

> Or put another way: the government cannot coerce Twitter or any other platform to carry someone else’s speech.

You're making a straw man that's not what I said...

The government can't ask or suggest or apply undue pressure to Twitter to ban content. Social media has been sued for this successfully to get people unbanned.

The Twitter files are not even about Twitter being coerced to put things on their site. What are you even talking about?

>>TeeMas+Qr
Requiring that Twitter not ban Person X is tantamount to requiring that they carry Person X’s content. Which is why people have no “right” to use something like Twitter - making that a right would infringe upon others’ rights.

At least that’s how it works under US law. I get the impression you’re not so familiar with American law though?

Yes they can ask and suggest removal. They cannot coerce but we have no reason to believe they did. I already linked to a long list of case law establishing this. Have a good rest of your weekend!

>>ethanb+at
I guess it's too late for you to see this, but the latest Twitter Files show that Twitter did, in fact, feel pressured and coerced.

https://twitter.com/ShellenbergerMD/status/16048884298162094...

In fact, most of the comments in support of Twitter and the FBI throughout these threads are pretty decisively debunked in the continued reports.