For the eleventy billionth time, deciding what speech you want to carry and what speech you want to exclude is an *exercise* of the First Amendment—not a violation of it—and “amending Section 230” won’t alter that reality, because the First Amendment itself protects that right.
https://twitter.com/vivekgramaswamy/status/1402020706343288833
Their angle is that while Facebook, Twitter, Google, and other behemoths can afford the compliance costs of Section 230 reform, their would-be competitors can’t. Regulating the competition out of business is a tactic as old as time.
https://twitter.com/is_wacky/status/1402388605809668102
We can always have this unhinged lunatic again. 
https://twitter.com/Andysmaps/status/1402409146092118016
Mark Zuckerberg was about 12 years old when Section 230 passed, and the only thing recognizable as “social media” at the time was *maybe* AOL instant messenger, ya dummy.
https://twitter.com/pedsscrub/status/1402974386836099072
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
