Run and hide from what? You? Your baseless and biased opinions? Someone who can't form and present an argument substantiated by facts? Someone who clearly has no idea who is pulling the strings? You think it is liberals who are oppressing First Amendment rights on social media? Below is an except of a ruling in favour of a public access channel that operates out of N.Y. The ruling represents which ideological camp is in favour of denying First Amendment rights.
The Supreme Court decision was voted in favour by the conservative chief justices, not the liberal-leaning chief justices. "
In a 5–4 decision, split between the conservative and liberal justices, the court ruled that the Manhattan Neighborhood Network could not face lawsuits for deciding not to air content that criticized it.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote on behalf of the majority that, while the First Amendment's free speech clause applies to "state actors" or governmental entities, the network is a private entity, not a state actor: "Providing some kind of forum for speech is not an activity that only governmental entities have traditionally performed," the decision reads. "Therefore, a private entity who provides a forum for speech is not transformed by that fact alone into a state actor."
In their dissent,
the Supreme Court's liberal justices maintained that First Amendment constraints should apply to the Manhattan Neighborhood Network: "By accepting that agency relationship, MNN stepped into the City's shoes and thus qualifies as a state actor," Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote, "subject to the First Amendment like any other."
The court ruled that First Amendment protections don't apply to a corporation that operates a public access channel in New York.
psmag.com
Now, I know you think Trump is on the right side of everything, but again, guess who opposed freedom of speech with respect to twitter when his opinions were being criticized?
In this case, the White House did not contend that the users who were blocked by Trump were abusive or harassing. Instead, the Justice Department stipulated in 2017 that the users were blocked because they posted tweets that criticized Trump or his policies.
On July 11, 2017, the Knight Institute filed a lawsuit in federal court against President Trump and his aides for blocking seven people from the @realDonaldTrump Twitter account based on their criticism of his presidency and policies. ]
Siding against the White House, a federal appellate court in New York voted 7-2 to leave in place a decision that President Donald Trump violated the First Amendment by blocking critics on Twitter. "a three-judge panel of the 2nd Circuit rejected the White House's position, ruling that evidence of the account's official nature was “overwhelming.”
The Justice Department then urged the 2nd Circuit for a new hearing in front of all or most of the circuit's judges.
On Monday, the 2nd Circuit denied that request, with two judges -- Michael Park and Richard Sullivan -- dissenting. Park and Sullivan were both appointed by Trump to the 2nd Circuit in the last two years; Sullivan was previously appointed to the Southern District of New York by former president George W. Bush.
Siding against the White House, a federal appellate court in New York voted 7-2 to leave in place a decision that President Donald Trump violated the First Amendment by blocking critics on Twitter.
www.mediapost.com
Lastly, to address your point about the terrible danger that left-wing extremists pose,
https://www.congress.gov/116/bills/s894/BILLS-116s894is.xml (“Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act of 2019” )
Congress finds the following:
(1) White supremacists and other far-right-wing extremists are the most significant domestic terrorism threat facing the United States.
(2)
On February 22, 2019, a Trump Administration United States Department of Justice official wrote in a New York Times op-ed that “white supremacy and far-right extremism are among the greatest domestic-security threats facing the United States. Regrettably, over the past 25 years, law enforcement, at both the Federal and State levels, has been slow to respond. … Killings committed by individuals and groups associated with far-right extremist groups have risen significantly.”.
(3) An April 2017 Government Accountability Office report on the significant, lethal threat posed by domestic violent extremists explained that “
ince September 12, 2001, the number of fatalities caused by domestic violent extremists has ranged from 1 to 49 in a given year.” The report noted: “[F]atalities resulting from attacks by far right wing violent extremists have exceeded those caused by radical Islamist violent extremists in 10 of the 15 years, and were the same in 3 of the years since September 12, 2001. Of the 85 violent extremist incidents that resulted in death since September 12, 2001, far right wing violent extremist groups were responsible for 62 (73 percent)
These are credible sources, legitmate court decisions, and a federal gov't bill.
The social medial debate is ongoing and evolving, and the more I've researched it the more I'm divided how best it should be handled. FB was used extensively for ISIL campaigning and recruitment, same goes for white-supremacist garbage promoting their views.
There are liberal and conservative actors on both sides, it's certainly not black and white, but if that's the world you live in then that explains your views.
