Considering that ToS are intentionally opaque / full of legalese the average person doesn't understand, and that companies can change their ToS pretty much without warning and with minimal notification to the end user ("here's an email resembling spam saying our terms of service have changed in some way"), I don't consider this to be a legitimate defense. With Schwab you sign a contract that can't trivially be changed. I don't remember doing any such thing with Robinhood.