Will give crown
sam posted a series of hateful comments on a social media site. the social media site banned sam. sam argues this is a violation of his first amendment right to free speech and he should be allowed back on the social media site. did the social media site violate sam's constitutional right to free speech? yes; the first amendment clearly states speech is a protected right. social media is a form of speech that cannot be limited. no; the first amendment prevents the government from limiting sam's speech. private companies can decide what speech is acceptable on their social media site. yes; the first amendment protects sam's right to speak freely on social media. this right cannot be limited by government or a company like a social media site. no; the first amendment protects the right of the press to speak freely. private citizens like sam are not protected.

No; the First Amendment prevents the government from limiting Sam's speech. Private companies can decide what speech is acceptable on their social media site.

Explanation:

The US Supreme Court already has decided that there are several categories of speech and that some of them can be limited by the government such as the ones that include obscenity, speech integral to illegal conduct, speech that incites imminent lawless action, speech that violated intellectual property law, speech that are true threats and others.

lee and grant, both of whom held the highest rank in their respective armies, had known each other slightly during the mexican-american war (1846-48) and began their dialogue by exchanging awkward personal inquiries. characteristically, grant had arrived in his mud-splattered field uniform while lee had turned out in full dress attire, complete with sash and sword.

explanation:

not really sure i needed the points. sorry