The main groups that are opposed to free speech are Feminism and The Social Justice movement.  When these groups are called out they, they reframe the argument at “hate speech,” then followed by censorship because they can’t compete in the open marketplace of ideas.  

This has to do with Google, YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter barring content providers.  In addition, these social media companies are the online equivalent of the public square.  For example, YouTube openly admits it bars revenue to anyone who speaks out against Feminism.

These content creators rely on the income generated by the views and they have a real world impact.  

One long-term solution to these Social Justice witch hunts are the promotion of alternatives like BitChute, Minds, and Gab.

The inevitable solution is to sue them into the stone age.  In Packingham vs North Carolina, the supreme court ruled that streets, and parks, and consequently social media platforms are a forum for 1st amendment rights.  In addition, the Supreme Court has ruled that Hate Speech is a valid 1st amendment right.  When social media ban users and customers for “Hate Speech,” that means they are liable.  The bottom line is that these users and consumers have lost their personal and business civil rights to promote and profit.

The legal community agrees that these social media giants are paper tigers.  Gab and Prager U have filed against YouTube.  When you file in Federal Court, these social media giant are for punitive damages in the Billions.  This will send a message that when social media companies violate the constitution, there are real consequences.

On a side not, since illegal aliens have constitutional rights, even non US citizens could in theory file a law suit.