The courts have precedent that would cover this if online speech equals free speech. Part of the reason I want the government to assume responsibility is because it'll either force them to acknowledge they're the same or craft specific laws for online speech. Part of people's frustration is that the rules are all over the place.
> Even if you do, and everyone's in agreement, you're effectively sanctioning off the social media sites to only allow posts from US nationals
That's a silly conclusion. Do US companies only enforce US fraud or sanction laws despite operating in another country? The answer is no. There's regionalization baked into services operated on other regions. I've worked on such services.
Websites, as they globalize, have to do this with regular frequency.
Nit pick: it's not "actions" impacting others. It's when person A exercises their rights to impede anothers. This kind of argumentation that cloud providers don't provide conduit or extenders for free speech is pretty lost on me, but I'm also of the opinion that all of these services should be highly regulated or government owned so that these silly pedantic, and at times opportunistic, arguments stop. It's become the wedge issue of the internet.