Thread by @BerinSzoka

#Parler can't use #antitrust to sue against "political animus" because the First Amendment protects Twitter & Amazon's right to refuse to carry abhorrent content

Parler's lawsuit will be dismissed for failing to allege that AWS & Twitter conspired to suppress competition

🧵

https://twitter.com/ProfWrightGMU/status/1348697904307986434

Under clear Supreme Court precedent, Parler would have to prove that Amazon shut off service for non-political reasons

Parler & AWS don't compete. To show that AWS blocked Parler for anticompetitive reasons, Parler must show that AWS conspired with Twitter against Parler.

Instead, Parler complains that AWS was inconsistent in enforcing its Acceptable Use Policy, which reserves broad discretion to remove "harmful" or "offensive" or "otherwise objectionable" content

Parler claims AWS tolerated equally incendiary content on Twitter and that it should have been enough that Parler took down incendiary content when AWS complained about it

This completely misses the point: Twitter's content moderation system is imperfect, as are all content moderation systems

But Parler has chosen NOT to build any content moderation system at all, and instead only to take down content (including child porn) upon complaint

AWS made an editorial judgment not to associate itself with a service that refused refused to take any proactive measures to clean up content that would NEVER survive on any respectable social network

Content like this

And it's not just the attack on the Capitol. Parler has been a cesspool of racist and openly Nazi content since it launched

Morally, AWS *should* have shut off service to Parler as soon it became clear that the site wasn't going to moderate this kind of content in 2019

But the First Amendment protects AWS's right to change its mind and decide that, at last, enough is enough

Our recent paper explains in detail why the First Amendment will not allow the courts to second-guess editorial judgments about how much incitement or Nazi shit AWS is willing to tolerate

gaidigitalreport.com/2020/10/04/sec…

Parler's breach of contract claim will fail for the same reasons: AWS always required adherence with its acceptable use policy and is now, belatedly, enforcing that policy

How to interpret the policy is entirely up to them--an editorial judgment protected by the First Amendment

Read Parler's garbage pseudo-legal complaint here techfreedom.org/490405156-parl…

And here's Lorain Journal (1951), the Supreme Court case that recognized that #antitrust law can't supersede the First Amendment
casetext.com/case/lorain-jo…