The owner of the company can still suspend an on air personality and it’s not infringing on free speech because it’s not the government forcing that person off the air but rather the network they work for. Also free speech is specifically a congressional issue, the first amendment saying that congress can make no law stifling speech. It actually says nothing about legislative or judicial branches stopping speech. So it would specifically be that congress wrote a bill to kick him off the air. Otherwise it’s all fair game.
Sure, if you ignore the fact that CBS settled with Trump for $16 million because he didn’t like their free speech, and now they have new Trumpian leadership. You’re absolutely right they have the legal right do do what they want with their business. but the alternative is being attacked by the government again, so is that your real argument?
The owner of the company can still suspend an on air personality and it’s not infringing on free speech because it’s not the government forcing that person off the air but rather the network they work for. Also free speech is specifically a congressional issue, the first amendment saying that congress can make no law stifling speech. It actually says nothing about legislative or judicial branches stopping speech. So it would specifically be that congress wrote a bill to kick him off the air. Otherwise it’s all fair game.
It’s the government forcing the network forcing the person off air.
Sure, if you ignore the fact that CBS settled with Trump for $16 million because he didn’t like their free speech, and now they have new Trumpian leadership. You’re absolutely right they have the legal right do do what they want with their business. but the alternative is being attacked by the government again, so is that your real argument?
By the letter of the law, yes. But decades of Supreme Court case law disagree with you.
https://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/censorship
You never even heard of Tinker?