E. Scott Cracraft: Banning Trump from social media is allowed under Constitution

To The Daily Sun,

 

In spite of false claims by Mr. Trump and his supporters that banning them from social media is unconstitutional, people should realize that it is fully constitutional! The First Amendment only protects us from censorship and retribution by government, not by private companies. 

 

It is ironic that many Trump supporters say they believe in the rights of free enterprise, but it seems they only believe in that when it threatens them and the disinformation they are spreading. Free speech does not mean you cannot face social and non-governmental consequences if your posts and speech are outrageous.

 

The only ones who are expressing a desire for true censorship are Trump and his supporters. At Trump rallies, reporters have been hurt. Republicans are passing laws that violate academic freedom. Trump and his supporters view a free press as "the enemy of the people."

 

How many times did Trump himself threaten to shut down the Washington Post and The New York Times? He even threatened to get rid of Saturday Night Live because they made fun of him! What president has not been roasted on SNL since the show came out?

 

Even if social media posts were somehow protected by the First Amendment, it is important to remember that while the rights in the First Amendment are pretty comprehensive in their application, they are not absolute.  Usually you fully have a right until that right starts to interfere with another's rights, or the rights of the society.  Obviously you cannot perform human sacrifice, even if it is part of your religious belief system. One of those exceptions to the First Amendment is fomenting and inciting sedition and violence.

 

But, social media is not even covered by the First Amendment. A private social media company or broadcasting company can ban things they do not want.  That is their right. The same is true of most print and broadcast media. The  mainstream broadcasting companies could, if they want, label Trump's speeches as "dangerous" and refuse to carry them. Why should Trump and others be worried, anyway? There are always FOX and NEWSMAX to carry "the other side."

 

For example, I write a lot of letters to The Sun. That is my "Freedom of the Press." The editor, however, can choose not to publish it. That is their freedom of the press.  Or, perhaps you express an opinion in my house, which to me, is outrageous  and offensive. I have a perfect right to ask you to leave my house!

 

E. Scott Cracraft

 

Gilford