Complaints that social platforms censor political speech are as old as the platforms. This domain’s former site published one in 2011, asking whether Facebook was “really censoring political free speech in America.” The legal answer has been consistent: the First Amendment restricts the government, not private companies. The more interesting questions are about when government pressure turns a company’s decision into the government’s.
The state action rule
The First Amendment says “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech.” Courts apply it to every level of government, but not to private parties. In Manhattan Community Access Corp. v. Halleck (2019), the Supreme Court held that even a private company running public-access cable channels was not bound by the First Amendment. A platform removing a post, limiting its reach or banning an account is, legally, a private editorial decision.
Platforms have speech rights too
Texas and Florida passed laws in 2021 restricting how large platforms could moderate political content. In Moody v. NetChoice (2024), the Supreme Court sent both cases back to lower courts, but the majority opinion made clear that choosing what to show and how to rank it is expressive activity protected by the First Amendment, much like a newspaper choosing what to print.
When the government leans on platforms
The line can blur when officials pressure a company to remove speech. If the government coerces or significantly encourages a private decision, it can be treated as government action. In Murthy v. Missouri (2024), the Court dismissed a challenge to federal officials’ contacts with platforms about COVID-19 and election content because the plaintiffs could not show the contacts caused their posts to be removed, leaving the deeper question open. In National Rifle Association v. Vullo (2024), the Court unanimously held that a state official could not threaten regulated companies to punish a group for its views.
Section 230
A federal law, Section 230, protects platforms from most lawsuits over what users post and over good-faith moderation. It is often blamed for “censorship” and for the lack of it, sometimes in the same breath. See our Section 230 explainer.
What this means for users
If a platform removes your post, your options are its appeal process and, for some decisions on very large platforms, independent review bodies like Meta’s Oversight Board. Users in the European Union also have appeal rights under the Digital Services Act. In the U.S., a lawsuit claiming the First Amendment was violated will almost always fail unless the government was directly involved.