Maiden Voyage
Gold™ Member
In that court filing I linked earlier.Where did you see that twitter lawyers in court ever claimed that the twitter files were filtered before being given to journalists, and why would that possibly legally benefit them to even make that claim?
I also do get that Twitter lawyers in court might agree that the government did not FORCE twitter to do anything. That is not the accusation. The accusation is that the government influenced and directed twitter to remove legal speech under the threat of removing twitter's legal protection and using the press to pressure the company and create bad publicity for them, all of which circumvents / violates the first amendment of the constitution.
If we were talking about Russia, and their government said to facebook "we're going to make it so people can sue you, unless you remove more of the posts we tell you to remove" no one in the US would be defending that, and they don't even have a first amendment to prevent that sort of thing. It's authoritarian behavior for a government to dictate what their citizens can say on the internet like that, and that's especially true when it censors particular government criticism, which is what the US government did with twitter.