I wonder, why did they use a First Amendment claim rather than something to do with safe harbour considerations (Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act)?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230_of_the_Communicati...

My understanding in this area is thin, but from what I understand the big tech media companies often claim limited or no liability for user generated content because of the above legal considerations. If so, and they then go on curate content, that would seem to be allowing them to accept the upside of being a publisher (a curated experience they can sell to customers and other stakeholders) without accepting the downside (liability for copyright infringement, slander and libel, etc.).

I'm not sure why PragerU's legal team didn't push in this area rather than the admittedly dodgy First Amendment claim.

edit: grammar.