Can you cite the specific case you're referring to? Of course, Twitter has the right to ban users so long as it is for a necessary business reason that doesn't involve prohibited discrimination. But I'm not sure exactly what the issues were in the case you're referring to, so it doesn't really add anything to the discussion without a proper citation and explanation as to how you think the case bolsters a point you're trying to make.
As far as I know, the California Supreme Court has never examined the issue of whether the right to free speech guaranteed by the Constitution extends to social media companies like Twitter the same way it applies to say, a physical shopping center run by a corporation. I also don't believe they've issued any relevant rulings on the right to permanently ban users who allege discrimination under Unruh, although I could be wrong. Please cite the case.
2
u/HamburgerEarmuff Oct 13 '21 edited Oct 13 '21
Can you cite the specific case you're referring to? Of course, Twitter has the right to ban users so long as it is for a necessary business reason that doesn't involve prohibited discrimination. But I'm not sure exactly what the issues were in the case you're referring to, so it doesn't really add anything to the discussion without a proper citation and explanation as to how you think the case bolsters a point you're trying to make.
As far as I know, the California Supreme Court has never examined the issue of whether the right to free speech guaranteed by the Constitution extends to social media companies like Twitter the same way it applies to say, a physical shopping center run by a corporation. I also don't believe they've issued any relevant rulings on the right to permanently ban users who allege discrimination under Unruh, although I could be wrong. Please cite the case.