No no no.

As a political office holder, he is not a private citizen. His speech is by definition government speech. Attempting to force private entities to broadcast government speech is...precisely the opposite of censorship.

With what? He violated the TOS, and as a private citizen (or Commander in Chief, for that matter) he is not above the arbitration of digital contracts. There's no way this case isn't instantly thrown out, provided the judge has even a cursory familiarity with software licensing.

You can violate a TOS that encroach upon your rights granted by the government you know.

What TOS? He posted nothing violating TOS, considering how far worse is regularly overlooked just because of political origin. ...which is the point of the suit.

You are incorrect, and if these suits ever reach court, the defendants will demonstrate that.