Comment by pests

And to add to that, USA's 1st Amendment applies only to actions by the government. But this does mean that in other situations that redress is never available. It just may require more nuance or collective action, or conversely, even the willingness to let something go.

(I am not commenting in this message on whether an HN issue may exist or should be let go. On those matters, I am still reading.)

In the case of shadow banning, you haven't kicked them off your property. You're asking them to stay while you earn ad money from their attention.

See the linked tweet for a more lawyerly argument in defense of shadow banning. The question before the court may hinge upon whether or not shadow banning expresses a message.