By Natural Law I mean the God given unalienable rights natural to the state of our species that the Declaration of Independence asserted were self evident truths. Some of those rights being explicitly recognized such as the freedom of speech and of the press. Specifically the Bill of Rights assured the federal government to be formed was not authorized to make laws to abridge them. But that explicit language in no way implies that natural law does not cover more than stopping such federal abridgememt. The rights can also be violated by private companies as proxies. If a company controls the most common forum of political debate and under coercive pressure from government selectively censors individuals from the discussion that is a violation of natural law with a private company as its agent rather than the government. For forums that are like clubs there is no natural right for a person to invade. But for big forums that are the de facto market place of ideas there certainly is. Natural Law is what is behind the Constutution. It is not limited to what the Constitution is explicit about. And this fact is actually explicit in the last two amendments of the Bill of rights. The public owns the market place of ideas collectively and any people that gains control of it have the same natural right obligation to free speech no matter that they are a corporation or a government panel.
Gotcha, thanks for the explanation. I think what you are saying is that Twitter is not violating US law for restricting free speech, but they are violating a natural law of God. That law of God is somewhat specific and allows for content moderation on websites that are more like clubs, but does not allow of content moderation on large, general-purpose websites.
Excellent.