1/ Imagine that, @WSJopinion continues to have absolutely no editorial standards, publishing yet another completely asinine anti- #Section230 op-ed. This time it& #39;s from @SenatorHagerty / @BillHagertyTN, who gets the law embarrassingly wrong for a US senator https://www.wsj.com/articles/goodbye-section-230-hello-liberty-11619476294">https://www.wsj.com/articles/...

2/ The first paragraph tells you just how stupid this piece is about to be, demonstrating that @BillHagertyTN @SenatorHagerty has absolutely no idea that the First Amendment protects you only from government regulation of/punishment for speech. Shameful for an elected official.

3/ So it is perhaps unsurprising that he also doesn& #39;t know (or is just flat-out lying) that the purpose of Section 230 was actually to enable web providers to establish content moderation guidelines, and not to enable anyone to say anything they want on any website they choose.

4/ So he& #39;s proposed yet another asinine bill.

5/ But here& #39;s the problem. Social media platforms are not common carriers, as @BerinSzoka and myself explained here: https://www.lawfareblog.com/wall-street-journal-misreads-section-230-and-first-amendment">https://www.lawfareblog.com/wall-stre...

Ok ok, I& #39;m going to try to be nicer and more benefit-of-the-doubty here, despite this being total argle-bargle, so here& #39;s a good piece from @BerinSzoka & @corbinkbarthold addressing the "but Justice Thomas" argument: http://lawfareblog.com/justice-thomass-misguided-concurrence-platform-regulation">https://lawfareblog.com/justice-t...