content: Twitter deleted the account of an organization called, "American Renaissance" (AR) AR sued Twitter and made a number of claims, including violation of the first amendment. The judge threw out all of the claims except one. The claim that was not thrown out is being called a "victory." The claim that was not thrown out (and can thus proceed to trial where it may or may not win) is:   Twitter promoted itself as a service that businesses could use.   Businesses like AR used the service and created something of value (an account with a following).    The account had actual monetary value that can be calculated using Twitter's own marketing materials (in other words, Twitter's own corporate PR people will try to sell you on the idea of using Twitter by making claims about the monetary value of a successful Twitter presence).   When Twitter deletes an account, they are taking away something that has real monetary value - they're causing monetary damage.   Here's my non-lawyer analysis: even if they win their case, which is a long shot, it wont stop Twitter from banning conservatives. Individual conservatives will be banned with no recourse. Prominent conservatives will be banned and Twitter would have to pay them some small inconsequential sum based on the "value" of their account. In the future, Twitter will simply add something to its terms of service along the lines of, "you agree that your account has no monetary value" (if they don't already have that in there). It's also worth noting that Prager U sued Youtube using a similar argument and had their case thrown out. When it was dismissed, the judge specifically said that statements Youtube made about being a free, open platform for speech were not intended to be truthful (meaning, Prager U was naive to have believed them - but also meaning that the court will not force Youtube to abide by those statements). I suspect that precedent will be referenced in the AR case. Twitter will say, "it doesn't matter that our own marketing department says this account is valuable - you're not supposed to believe that - you're supposed to understand that it's a lie" Here's the thing though. If Silicon Valley was heavily conservative and if they were banning liberals, the 9th circuit (or whoever) would have already put a stop to it on first amendment grounds.