Thread by @RWPUSA

Yale Law Professor Jed Rubenfeld, currently suspended for two years over sexual harassment allegations, now attacks social media companies for banning persons who spread false information and advocate sedition.
techdirt.com/articles/20210…

The comment -- published in the Wall Street Journal of course -- is here:
wsj.com/articles/save-…

Here's the latest critic of tech companies for suspending insurrectionists, racists and liars from their platforms. Seems like a nice guy.
nytimes.com/2020/08/26/nyr…

Meanwhile, the top priority is assuring a steady supply of law clerks to Justice Kavanaugh to decide this and other weighty issues.
theguardian.com/us-news/2018/s…

The gist of Rubenfeld's argument is that Twitter and Facebook were under too much pressure from Congressional Democrats (who apparently have no free speech rights) to ban posts advocating violence and conspiracy theories so these companies are subject to the First Amendment. Huh?

If it wanted to (it doesn't) could the Wall Street Journal ban from its opinion pages law professors who harass their women students? Heck yes. WSJ is owned by a private company. What part of the First Amendment do these people not understand.

The theory: Because Congress can regulate your media platform, and because some people in Congress don't like what people say on your media platform, you lose your First Amendment right to decide what content you want on your media platform.
Circular logic? Indeed.

Online platforms are private companies and have the right to ban racists, insurrectionists and violent people from their platforms.
Retailers have the right to decide what pillows they sell.
What part of the First Amendment don't people understand?
cnn.com/2021/01/19/us/…