[DesertRhino]

Yes, but facebook currently enjoys legal protection from content based lawsuits because they claim they do not exercise editorial control.

They either have to stop editing based on political opinion OR give up the legal protection and be treated like a newspaper, or Verizon. What they are doing is like Verizon cancelling your service if you call the Trump campaign number.

[DiogenesLamp]

We should not allow any agency that carries large amounts of public speech traffic to censor it under any color of law. The act needs to be illegal, whether they are a "publisher" or a "carrier."

If they are putting forth only their opinions and not carrying public traffic, then sure, they can be a "publisher". But if they are carrying public traffic, they cannot be allowed to censor legal speech. Allowing this situation to continue may well destroy the nation, because virtually everything carry public speech nowadays belongs to "private" parties.

[semimojo]

Yes, but facebook currently enjoys legal protection from content based lawsuits because they claim they do not exercise editorial control...

Section 230 of the CDA explicitly allows FB, and other interactive computer services, to moderate content yet still have protection from lawsuits.

That was the point of the law.

We may not like it but there it is.