She did, but AFAIK she sued under contract laws, which us a very difficult argument to make for a completely free service. They set all the terms, owe us nothing, and we participate at their discretion.

This would be different because the companies do have a statutory responsibility not to discriminate under various jurisdictions' laws regardless of the terms of their contract. And we would show that there is a pattern of treatment affecting entire groups of people, not just one person. Plus, Reddit probably more than any other social media company has open itself up for this by actively discriminating between groups. It will be harder for them to show that they are simply trying to apply their rules evenly because they have gone so far beyond that.

I think we'd stand a good chance, and it would not necessarily have to cost a lot of money. Many places in the U.S. have agencies that investigate discrimination claims for free and attorney generals who might be willing to prosecute. I could see some up and coming conservative attorney general wanting to take this on. Censorship in tech is a hot topic for conservatives right now, and this would also gain them civil rights points.

If we were successful, it could bring the issue into public view and send a message to other tech companies to be careful with how actively they engage in substantive censorship.