Zuck's letter....

[TheBiggestJerk]

state action requirement​

The state action requirement refers to the requirement that in order for a plaintiff to have standing to sue over a law being violated, the plaintiff must demonstrate that the government (local, state, or federal), was responsible for the violation, rather than a private actor.

• This requirement only applies when the law in question requires the government to have acted.
• This state action requirement extends to a number of actions.

According to the Supreme Court in Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Co., Inc., 500 U.S. 614 (1991), “Although the conduct of private parties lies beyond the Constitution's scope in most instances, governmental authority may dominate an activity to such an extent that its participants must be deemed to act with the authority of the government and, as a result, be subject to constitutional constraints."

First Amendment​

The First Amendment states that “[c]ongress shall make no law” infringing upon the freedoms of speech and religion. Because of this requirement, it is impossible for a purely private party to violate this Amendment.

Discrimination​

In Edmonson, the Supreme Court wrote that "discrimination, though invidious in all contexts, violates the Constitution only when it may be attributed to state action."


So now if Zuck continues he will be liable for violating the first amendment by state action, as the collusion with government will only obscure who actually is calling the shots, the government or thr private actor.

 

[shar-vell Dan]

Don't know anyone that takes "meta" serious.

 

[rsm]

Don't know anyone that takes "meta" serious.

other than the Bozo Biden campaign team in 2020, the FBI, all those current and former US intelligence execs that signed the letter about Hunter's laptop,...

you know, the deep state demoncrats that are never held accountable.

 

[harddriver]

Zuck said that he took his marching from the “FBI, seriously!”.

So an open blatant violation of the 1st amendment and not one thing will be done about it since the Supreme court did not strike down Federal Censorship in the Missouri case.