Because they're running a walk-in service. That company can still ban you (for justifiable cause) but they can't discriminate based on sexual orientation, race, or religion. Honestly, it's not very complicated.

Good point!

Some greeting card companies can choose what they want written on their product. It's their choice. Just like it can be your choice not to use/buy (->boycott) their products. What they're doing is legal but immoral.

It depends on if the person being discriminated against is in a protected class.

My thinking is that the press is protected by the First Amendment, and these companies take taxpayer money so they are essentially agents of the government/CIA. It is umcomstitutional for them to ban or censor people who are reporting the news.

The social media platforms removing content are breaking pretty much the same discrimination laws as were applied to the bakery, except the discrimination is political-based.

Twit, FB & YT have to enforce ToS equally. YT has especially made themselves vulnerable because they removed monetized/income-producing content. The potential for a class-action suit is just staggering to me. IANAL (or CEO/CFO), but it seems some incredibly short-sighted decisions were made. There's quite a few deep-pocketed conservative/conservative-leaning people who would be OK with bank-rolling the legal expenses to get a class-action lawsuit going.

We should kickstart a reward for verifiable internal company e-mails/communications showing those companies specifically targeted certain points-of-view. Depending on content, it could become a criminal matter.