The large social media companies–all of them privately owned–have consistently asserted a right to take down posts they consider to be self-evidently false and dangerous to the public interest. They view this as a form of “editing” that is clearly protected by the First Amendment. Some states dominated by the GOP, however, disagree. Their governments argue that the “editing” is actually “censorship” and that the private companies provide public spaces in which all opinions must be welcomed. It will be up to the Supreme Court to determine which side is right.
On issues involving right-wing book bans in public facilities, however, Florida has taken a completely different view. Attorneys representing state and local governments have argued that government has a right to discriminate against views it dislikes, because that form of editing in public facilities is “government speech.” In other words, the government has the First Amendment right to edit on the basis of content, but private companies do not.
To the extent you can call this “logic,” it turns the First Amendment, which only applies to government action, on its head. That isn’t just incredibly hypocritical–it’s extremely dangerous. It isn’t an exaggeration to say that free speech in America is on the line in these cases. Our system will survive if the Supreme Court rules incorrectly that “editing” by private companies is “censorship,” but a decision stating that the government has the right to limit speech in actual public spaces on the basis of content would have a huge negative impact on the fate of liberal democracy in America.