Can social media companies limit free speech?

The text of the First Amendment itself only prevents Congress (i.e., U.S. Congress) from making laws that restrict the freedom of speech. In other words, a private person or private company (such as a social media company) cannot violate your constitutional free speech rights, only the government can do so.

Is social media 1st Amendment?

The First Amendment protects individuals from government censorship. Social media platforms are private companies, and can censor what people post on their websites as they see fit.

What was Clarence Thomas’s views on the Constitution?

The Senate confirmed Thomas by a vote of 52–48. Supreme Court experts describe Thomas’s jurisprudence as textualist, stressing the original meaning of the United States Constitution and statutes.

What did Clarence Thomas do?

Clarence Thomas is an associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. He was nominated by President George H.W. Bush (R) to fill the seat left vacant by Thurgood Marshall and was sworn in on October 23, 1991, becoming the second black justice to sit on the Court in U.S. history.

Which countries have a ban on social media?

As of May 2016, the only countries to ban access around the clock to the social networking site are China, Iran, Syria, and North Korea. However, since most North Korean residents have no access to the Internet, China and Iran are the only countries where access to Facebook is actively restricted in a wholesale manner.

What is Clarence Thomas known for as a justice?

Eventually, the Senate confirmed Thomas in October 1991 by the narrowest margin in a century. Clarence Thomas is the second black justice and the only one currently sitting on the bench. As a Supreme Court justice, Thomas is notorious for his lack of questions during oral arguments.

Which explains why six proposed amendments to the Constitution?

Which explains why six proposed amendments to the Constitution have not become law? 1. They were not ratified by two-thirds of state legislatures. They were not ratified by three-fourths of state legislatures.

Is Clarence Thomas a strict constructionist?

Bush promised to appoint “strict constructionists in the mold of Justices Rehnquist, Scalia, and Thomas”, though Thomas considers himself an originalist, and Scalia outright rejected strict construction, calling it “a degraded form of textualism.”

Can anybody say anything they want wherever they want to whomever they want?

ACLU, a unanimous Supreme Court specifically extended the First Amendment to written, visual and spoken expression posted on the Internet. Of course, the First Amendment doesn’t give us the right to say whatever we want, whenever we want, to whomever we want. But that doesn’t stop people from thinking otherwise.

Should social media companies be treated as speakers for First Amendment purposes?

He goes to the opposite extreme and says that social media companies should not be treated as speakers at all for First Amendment purposes. Rather, like telephone companies, they should be reconceptualized as neutral, passive conveyors of the speech of others.

Is Justice Thomas right about social media censorship?

Economist Marshall Auerbach writing in the conservative American Compass welcomedJustice Thomas’s refusal to require a showing of market power before designating social media as common carriers and praised his “promising function-centric approach.” Of course, It is not just conservatives who are concerned with social media censorship.

Are social media companies common carriers with no speech rights?

This conception of social media companies as common carriers with no or severely restricted speech rights corresponds to the way they present themselves to the world as platforms for others to speak. It also reflects our intuitive understanding of what we are doing when we use social media platforms.

What are the speech rights of the platforms?

It is the speech rights of the users that are paramount. The platforms are there merely as enablers of the speech of others. As precedent Justice Thomas cites the Turner Broadcastingcase that required cable operators to carry broadcast signals.