The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that Congress shall make no law abridging (curtailing) the freedom of speech. Thus, free speech is only protected by the U.S. Constitution when it is the government that seeks to limit free speech. And the First Amendment is inapplicable when a nongovernmental person or entity—such as a social media company—seeks to limit free speech. But despite the legal authority of social media companies to regulate speech on their platforms, there is an ongoing debate about whether such companies should regulate speech, and if so, the extent and manner in which they should do so.

In Arkansas, as in all states, the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects individuals from government actions that would abridge their freedom of speech. This means that the state and federal governments cannot restrict speech except under certain circumstances, such as when the speech incites violence or constitutes a true threat. However, the First Amendment does not apply to private entities, including social media companies. These companies are legally allowed to regulate speech on their platforms according to their terms of service and community guidelines. The debate in Arkansas and nationwide continues over the role of social media companies in regulating speech, with some advocating for these platforms to take more responsibility in moderating content to prevent harm, and others arguing for minimal interference to preserve free expression. While the First Amendment does not restrict these companies, there is ongoing discussion at both the state and federal levels about potential regulations that could affect how these platforms manage speech.