Don't they need to demonstrate actual damages? Also, if Facebook et al left his messages up, when they take messages from others down and have automatic tacking systems, wouldn't Facebook et al be responsible for the damages? Further, since Facebook et al were funded by Darpa and other government agencies, couldn't he sue the those agencies for violating the equal protection clause for arbitrarily and copriciously censoring his speech, as demonstrated by not prosecuting during one Administration and then prosecuting after 4 yeas?
Convincing people their vote was counted when it wasn't seems like damages enough.
No, that's not how our laws work. FB has 1st amendment rights as well, and are free to remove whatever they see fit.
No, as you can't prove they were DARPA funded, and even if they were, wtf does that have to do with this? FB by legal definition is NOT a government entity, so they aren't subject to the 1st amendment as it applies to governments.
Please demonstate the individuals actually convinced by the accused actions.
By selectively allowing and disallowing content according to whatever adminstration is in office, FB is functioning as a Government Agent and subject to the rules of the government.
Those that replied by text thinking they voted, done.
No, they're acting as a private corporation within their 1st amendment rights. As long as they were not directed by government to do this, of course.
(post is archived)