First Amendment Frenzy

"Supreme Court justices seem unlikely to extend First Amendment protections to users of social media platform such as Facebook and Twitter" I read when I woke up this morning as it scrolled across my screen from CNBC. Whaaaaat? 

The Supreme Court, our Supreme Court, has always intrigued me. The fact that 9 people have power over the entire nation is scary. Powerful, but scary. And, even more so, the fact that these 9 people are able to have rule over social media companies by moderating what they have on their platforms may be even scarier.

I don't mean scary in a bad way, necessarily, but more so with the connotation of the control that the government can have. As we have seen, the USSC stays far away from entering an arena of this nature, but with the issues that are arising in social media these days, someone has to start paying attention.

So, here's the question: "does the first amendment apply to private companies operating private property?" 

While I don't think this will be a pressing issue within the next year, the Court heard the oral arguments, and that's a big step in addressing this question already. Based on the article, social media companies are currently interpreting the first amendment to use their discretion in removing content from their own platforms. That, to me, makes sense.

But should the government say what these private companies can and can't do on their platforms?

Think about that one, folks.

Lynds