>What's surprising is how often I encounter fellow Americans mistakenly asserting the first amendment extends beyond government and into the private sector.
I've only ever heard people complaining that people misunderstand the first amendment. I've yet to see someone say they believe the first amendment governs and protects against private censorship.
However, I constantly see people conflating the concept of free speech and the first amendment. Free speech is an ideological principle, not a law.
If you read the first section of the EO it is clear that they are attempting to make an argument that Twitter, by moderating/curating/screening, is no longer protected by section 230, as defined by the famous 90s court cases regarding prodigy, aol, and compuserve. [0] [1]
Spurious argument or not you are mischaracterizing the situation.
I'd be curious to hear real lawyers weigh in on this, but... that sounds pretty dubious to me. Executive orders aren't laws, they don't get interpreted by courts in general and they absolutely don't override existing case law! I mean, who cares what the executive branch says about section 230? We know what congress wrote, and we know how the judiciary has interpreted it, because we've already had that fight.
It seems like an executive order is more of a guideline on how they interpret the law. He mentions that congress would need to make changes to the law for it to have teeth. He also said there will be lawsuits on the way.
I've only ever heard people complaining that people misunderstand the first amendment. I've yet to see someone say they believe the first amendment governs and protects against private censorship.
However, I constantly see people conflating the concept of free speech and the first amendment. Free speech is an ideological principle, not a law.
If you read the first section of the EO it is clear that they are attempting to make an argument that Twitter, by moderating/curating/screening, is no longer protected by section 230, as defined by the famous 90s court cases regarding prodigy, aol, and compuserve. [0] [1]
Spurious argument or not you are mischaracterizing the situation.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratton_Oakmont,_Inc._v._Prod....
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeran_v._America_Online,_Inc.