YouTube Put On Notice For Censoring 2A Content!

Published on November 26, 2022
Duration: 9:01

This video discusses Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen's letter to YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki, putting the platform on notice for censoring Second Amendment content. The AG argues that YouTube's removal of legal firearm-related videos, such as instructions on finishing an 80% lower, infringes upon First and Second Amendment rights. The letter highlights that such content is lawful and not regulated by federal law, suggesting that states may regulate YouTube as a common carrier if it continues to censor disfavored political speech.

Quick Summary

Montana's Attorney General Austin Knudsen has put YouTube on notice for censoring legal Second Amendment content, arguing it violates First and Second Amendment rights. The AG stated that the home manufacture of firearms, including 80% lowers, is legal and not federally regulated, suggesting states may regulate YouTube as a common carrier.

Chapters

  1. 00:05YouTube Censoring Firearm Content
  2. 00:49Montana AG's Letter to YouTube
  3. 01:09Details of AG's Letter: Rogue Banshee Video
  4. 01:45Lawful Speech vs. Senatorial Pressure
  5. 02:35Legality of 80% Lowers and Home Manufacture
  6. 04:14YouTube's Role: Neutral Platform vs. Politics
  7. 06:06Regulating YouTube as a Common Carrier
  8. 07:27Demand to Restore Lawful Videos
  9. 07:50Conclusion: YouTube on Notice for 2A Censorship

Frequently Asked Questions

Why is Montana's Attorney General putting YouTube on notice?

Montana's Attorney General, Austin Knudsen, has formally notified YouTube of its censorship of legal Second Amendment and firearm-related content. The AG argues that YouTube's actions violate constitutional rights and that the platform is overstepping its bounds as a neutral content host.

What specific content did YouTube allegedly censor?

YouTube reportedly removed a video from the 'Rogue Banshee' channel that provided instructions on how to finish the construction of an 80% lower receiver. This content is considered lawful and is not regulated by federal law.

What are the legal arguments against YouTube's censorship?

The argument is that the censored videos contain lawful expressions of First and Second Amendment rights. Furthermore, the AG contends that senators pressured a private corporation to enact policies the federal government has not, circumventing democratic processes.

Could YouTube be regulated as a common carrier?

Yes, if YouTube continues to exercise quasi-sovereign control over political speech and censor disfavored viewpoints, states may begin to regulate the service as a common carrier. Legal scholars suggest platforms cannot simultaneously act as a town square and exclude specific political speech.

Related News

All News →

More 2nd Amendment & Law Videos You Might Like

More from Guns & Gadgets 2nd Amendment News

View all →