The cool thing about authoritarians is that they don't even attempt to base decisions on a solid foundation of settled law, or even a consistent ideology. That

The cool thing about authoritarians is that they don't even attempt to base decisions on a solid foundation of settled law, or even a consistent ideology. That's why we get bizarre contradictions like these "free speech" cases out of Texas. First they say that platforms aren't allowed to moderate the toxic sludge their users post, because that would violate the constitutional freedom of users to force platforms to amplify their toxic sludge. But only when it's toxic sludge that the authoritarians approve of. If it's toxic sludge the authoritarians don't like, then they say the platforms are not only allowed to moderate it, now they're required to remove it. What happened to the God-given constitutional right to post toxic sludge?