To allow this should mean EFF should also require fox news
No, this is a restriction on the government itself, not on Twitter. The point is that the government shouldn't be able to bypass restrictions on its powers by using private companies.
The core argument is that a private space (Twitter) can be a protected free speech zone. By that argument, nobody (including Twitter) can restrict those rights on the platform.
No, I don't think there's anything like a binary "protected free speech zone" property. It's always context-specific. They used the example of Television, where the government is restricted from blocking its official communications to certain people, yet that doesn't mean the channel itself can't choose what gets shown.
This is specific to the First Amendment restrictions on government, which don't apply to Twitter, as a private company. (IANAL)
You are mixing the two arguments being made, i.e. the right to be heard and the right to hear. Your argument is in favor of the right to hear what Trump says, but the point where it becomes a "free speech zone" is when it is about whether you're allowed to speak. To try and make blocking people on Twitter illegal for a politician means that they cannot censor those people _on Twitter_. There is no analogue for this in a 1-way communication system like TV.
Exactly right, and the article very clearly lays out this difference. A TV channel is more like the library’s official announcement board discussed in TFA. There is no expectation of, or right to, speech for anyone but the speaker, and that’s fine.
However, Twitter is a forum where everyone has a voice, and the President is using tools available on the platform to decide who gets to participate in the discussion by reading and responding to his tweets. It would be like saying, “fans of the library can post on the open message board in the lobby. Haters, you can use the message board down by the bathrooms.”
Point is, the EFF’s argument is that either everyone gets a say, or not — you can’t curate speech in a public forum based upon content, if you are a public official. And, make no mistake, Trump is the one hitting that “Block” button.
Yes, there is no expectation on TV that there will be live replies from anonymous people. And just like that expectation, there is the expectation that people can block other people and that is working exactly as it works for any other twitter user.
No, this is a restriction on the government itself, not on Twitter. The point is that the government shouldn't be able to bypass restrictions on its powers by using private companies.