I don’t understand why Facebook, Twitter and YoUTube are not considered public forums. In the US Supreme Court decision, Marsh V Alabama, a company owned town was held to be public and free speech rights could not be denied. “The owner, for his advantage, opens up his property for use by the public..”
also, in Bock V Westminster, the Colorado Supreme Court held that because a mall opened up its common areas to recruiters, town events, etc that it was considered a “latter day public forum” and free speech rights could not be denied.
Some common traits seem to be opening it up for government activity such as political offices or recruiters offices, community events, etc. Facebook, Twitter, YoUTube all have government / political activity, City Channels / pages etc.
I’m in Texas and I don’t understand why Cruz isn’t pushing this and Alex Jones can’t use this legal view to get the Courts involved.
Interesting case law - it does seem to fit the public forum of the internet. On the other hand - does this mean that Liberals can start posting whatever they want on Free Republic?
Not trying to be snarky - but it would seem to go both ways. Perhaps that is why they are trying to go after them with the anti-trust laws, rather than a free speech issue?
But again - I really like your two examples, and will have to try to remember them.