Perhaps you can cite something to add additional context. You amy or may not be aware that there are already laws designed to prevent discrimination against protected classes, and one sort of civil liberty is being able to enjoy the protection of the laws.

You're comparing the ban of an individual with the ban of a whole ethnicity, which are obviously not equivalent.

Fair point, but then I think my other reply makes sense here: if you believe that twitter's is "unchecked", you have to first admit that the US is a failed state. There's no other reasonable argument I can find where the US government would be unable to enjoin twitter from doing what it did.

Either that, or what twitter did is perfectly in line with civil liberties as defined by pretty much everyone. They exercised their right to free association. What law would you create to enjoin them from having done so?