thanx for locating the MARSH V ALABAMA decision. here’s an excerpt from the as related to Articles 1 & 14:
In its conclusion, the Court stated that it was essentially weighing the rights of property owners against the rights of citizens to enjoy freedom of press and religion. The Court noted that the rights of citizens under the Bill of Rights occupy a preferred position. Accordingly, the Court held that the property rights of a private entity are not sufficient to justify the restriction of a community of citizens’ fundamental rights and liberties.
Without legal expertise and with limited time, I still have to point out that there has to be some restrictions. An employee of your company cannot go about telling your customers that it is an awful company that cheats. You would have the right to fire that person.
The real issues with social media is 1/ the Republicans aided in passing a flawed bill of protection; 2/ Justice Clarence Thomas has said that it appears that social media is operating in a liable fashion; 3/ customers have the right to deflect their usage to other competitive sites.
Violation of monopoly laws is another issue. Prosecution would require an honest prosecutorial arm of the govt.