Free Speech and Private Power: Function-by-Function Analysis and Permissible Nondiscrimination Rules

The question is not whether an entire category of corporations (like social media companies) or a particular entity (like Facebook) is generally engaged in expression.

The majority of the Moody majority noted "that some platforms, in at least some functions, are indeed engaged in expressions" The interest in allowing people to better communicate with each other, free from certain kinds of discrimination imposed by platforms, he says.

David Gergen : A law that leaves platforms free to exclude posts from curated feeds, but forbids them from removing users or even posts outright, might be constitutional.

He says Moody appears to reaffirm PruneYard and Rumsfeld , which make clear that sometimes entities may indeed be compelled to carry the unwanted speech of others—including when those entities (such as universities) engage in a great deal of speech in their various other activities.