“The Constitution for these United States is the Supreme Law of the Land. Any law that is repugnant to the Constitution is null and void of law and effect from its inception.” ~ Marbury v. Madison; 1803
“Statutes that violate the plain and obvious principles of common right and common reason are null and void.” ~ Bennett v. Boggs; 1830
“A state may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by Federal constitution.” ~ Murdock v. Pennsylvania; 1943
“The claim and exercise of a constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime.” ~ Miller v. US; 1956
“If a State converts a liberty into a privilege the citizen can engage in the right with impunity.” ~ Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham; 1963
“There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of this exercise of constitutional rights.” ~ Sherer v. Cullen; 1973
And then specifically applied regarding . A private corporation which creates a platform for public use REVOKES ITS RIGHT (as though it were private property) TO CENSOR ON SAID PLATFORM.
Not sure you understand the English language.
Can I walk into your house and say any legal thing I want without yoy being allowed to stop me for any reason you see fit?
I do not make my house contractually available for public use. Social media corporations explicitly exist to make their platforms contractually available for public use. These are not the same concepts in any capacity whatsoever.
So, you can say anything you want on an airliner or a greyhound bus? How about a taxi or uber? Can I call a taxi driver a fuckin' nigger and not expect him to kick me out of his car?
And can you show me in those precedents where it is remotely suggested that making things available to the public is where free speech and 1A protections begin?
You said you had precedents for these things. Show them. Did you even bother to actually read Marsh v Alabama?
(post is archived)