Trump Argues Against YouTube ‘Discrimination’ in Section 230 Case
Communications Decency Act Section 230 doesn’t allow platforms to engage in “arbitrary discrimination” like banning users for political speech, attorneys for ex-President Donald Trump argued Tuesday in a lawsuit against YouTube in U.S. District Court in Oakland in docket 4:21-cv8009.…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
Trump sued Facebook, Google, Twitter and their CEOs in July, claiming his suspensions after the Jan. 6 insurrection amount to illegal censorship (see 2107070065). Congress intended for Section 230 to benefit all Americans, and a First Amendment principle is that “all persons have access to places where they can speak and listen,” Trump’s team filed in response to DOJ’s brief on the constitutionality of Section 230. Trump argued the social media platforms violated the First Amendment. Platforms like YouTube act as common carriers when they “solicit and host third-party content,” they argued: That means any applications of Section 230 that “protect acts of arbitrary discrimination by Defendants would be unconstitutional.”