They are not, they are contract carriers, as indicted by you needing a contract with them to just have an account. Outside of chosing to be common carriers sometimes congress can force companies to become common carriers (see ATT) but they
1) need an actual good cause
2) it must be the least restrictive means (to limit the rights of the owners) to accomplish the cause

The law can make ISPs be common carriers because they are telecoms, apps are information services not telecoms so they cannot be forced into it under the current law and there is little indication that forcing apps to be common carriers would not violate the constitution.

They are fighting to restrict speech of some people to give other people rights over the firsts property. They are not defending free speech, free speech outside of government action is a zero sum game.

Common carriers just need a justifiable reason, not a legal authority to do so.

I dont think you understand what you are talking about lol

230 was created directly to allow companies to make editorial decisions to without being liable for other peoples comments.

These have nothing to do with utilities. They are not a natural monopoly, they are not a governmental monopoly. They do not provide any service that tend to support a natural monopoly. You just want to remove their free speech.

Lol, and you like free speech until other peoples free speech dont work for you. Now you want to remove peoples free speech rather than use a platform that is ok with your speech.

I hope this does not affect my zillows 360 payment where they give me another 2% back after 60 days of closing on my house 60k over what everyone else offered me for it lol.

lol wut? I take it you live in a moble home.... Houses appreciate over time, they dont depreciate unless you fail to care for them.

Because in order to "undo" that one it would have required a full redeployment of troops into the area. Trump made a deal with a terrroist organization for a peace treaty. In exchange he gave them back their leader and spun down troops and promised to leave the area.

You are misinterpreting the constitution, apparently the “congress” part may be too hard for you, because twitter is not congress, or even a government per later amendments. You have no right to speech on private property.

Where in 230 does it define a platform, and how does it contradict with that of an editor or publisher?

Public telephones were a public utility because they had government issued monopolies and/or massive cost barriers to entry. That is not the case with social media companies were there are no monopolies and anyone can create one. The internet as a utility sure, but not social media. In addition making them a utility will not do away with their first amendment rights.

We need a FERPA/HIPAA based law but for LEOs

I dont understand your point. In fact this ruling is opposite of all that. What you are wanting to do is throw the baby out with the bath water and making violating AUPs a felony just so a cop can be punished, when there are better ways to punish that cop for his actions other than an overly vague and broad law that criminalizes accessing twitter from a work computer.

Sure a bad cop got off , but think of all those non-elites the law NOW cannot affect.