Everyone here is saying 1A doesn't constrain private parties. But that's missing the heart of PragerU's claim.

Section 230 gives internet platforms immunity for what users post. But at the same time, platforms want to moderate their content selecting which views are acceptable and which are not.

These are inherently conflicting things. Section 230 gives special protection on the assumption that platforms aren't involved in selecting what users post. But then with the other hand, platforms are selecting what users post via their content guidelines.

We have common carrier provisions for other communication mediums with no liability (ex. TV, ISP's). And we have liability for communication mediums with editorial control (ie. Newspapers, Magazines).

Tech companies are running up the center and making huge profits with an unfair legal advantage that no other communication medium gets.

Newspapers have to vet their classifieds and editorials. Facebook/YouTube/etc doesn't. And that is inherently unfair.

So either Congress or the Courts need to fix the law. And it's fair game for the courts, because the law is not being applied correctly to these platforms, given their abuses.