Thread by @MariaDinzeo

In the #9thCircuit today, @prageru is challenging a federal judge's dismissal of its First Amendment lawsuit against Google (YouTube), claiming it restricted access to its videos as a "political gag mechanism" against conservative content. @CourthouseNews

Attorney for @prageru argues that YouTube is a public forum and is subject to First Amendment of scrutiny. Judge Mary Margaret McKeown says, "You can puff and say you are a public forum but that does not define your First Amendment status."

@prageru Judge Jay Bybee says he is impressed by the list of videos @prageru has put in the record. “It seems deeply disturbing that they put your stuff in the restricted area," he says, adding, "But I’m not sure that creates a First Amendment issue.”

@prageru Google's attorney is up. Says YouTube is not discriminating against @prageru. Judge Bybee says, "If that’s your opening line you’re inviting us to make that judgment."

@prageru Judge McKeown: "Google has almost the equivalent of state power when it decides who can and cannot be hosted on that platform."

@prageru Judge Bybee: "Isn’t the remedy that they just have to get their own channel?"

@prageru Google attorney argues it would be a "scary" proposition for a private business to be able to "turn the First Amendment on or off" just by calling itself a public forum.

@prageru What a ride. Case is submitted. Full write up for @CourthouseNews on the way.

@prageru @CourthouseNews Prager University and YouTube clash over the First Amendment and Lanham Act @CourthouseNews bit.ly/30GRFW0