Twitter, that great defender of freedom of the press, has filed suit in a California federal court against Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, claiming that he abused the power of his office in early January to retaliate against Twitter for banning President Donald Trump’s account, after the storming of the Capitol on Jan. 6. On Jan. 13, Paxton had opened an investigation into Google, Facebook, Twitter, Amazon Web Services and Apple, into what he called “the seemingly coordinated deplatforming of the President.” He asked those entities to provide information on their policies and practices regarding content moderation, and, more specifically, for information on Parler. Parler was the social media app used by many conservatives as an alternative to Big Tech social media platforms, but was summarily terminated or blocked by Google, Amazon and Apple.
In a Jan. 13 press release, Paxton had charged that “the seemingly coordinated de-platforming of the President of the United States and several leading voices not only chills free speech, it wholly silences those whose speech and political beliefs do not align with leaders of Big Tech companies.”
Twitter’s lawsuit clearly intends to shut down Paxton’s investigation. Filed on March 8, it seeks to stop Paxton “from unlawfully abusing his authority as the highest law-enforcement officer of the State of Texas to intimidate, harass, and target Twitter in retaliation for Twitter’s exercise of its First Amendment rights,” the Texas Tribune reported. So, the Attorney General of one state is “intimidating and harassing” the monolithic Twitter? What it means by “First Amendment rights” is its decision to shut down President Trump’s account, which it describes as “protected free speech.” More revealing is that Twitter’s lawyers are requesting a temporary restraining order to prevent Paxton from obtaining the documents he’s requested, complaining that “Paxton made clear that he will use the full weight of this office, including his expansive investigatory powers, to retaliate against Twitter for having made editorial decisions with which he disagrees.”
