> I don't think the platforms should be allowed to censor user content, if [...] All these arguments end up having that complicated "if" clause, though. Becau

> I don't think the platforms should be allowed to censor user content, if [...] All these arguments end up having that complicated "if" clause, though. Because you have to squint very, very hard to find a way to understand this ruling as anything but disallowing content moderation. This very site. Hell, almost certainly this very thread, has copious dead comments suppressed precisely because of their undesired content. Accounts get banned here repeatedly. How is exactly is this legal in Texas? Yeah, you have to construct an "if". And let's be honest, in almost all cases that "if" is going to be tantamount to "they are moderating content I disagree with". And that's how you can tell this is a terrible ruling. It grants the government broad ability to disallow moderation without giving anyone a clear set of rules for which moderation is acceptable beyond "big tech bad".