I appreciate your taking the time to compose a thoughtful response to this post.

It would seem that 47 U.S.C. sec. 230(c)(1) should also cover a nonprofit who has initially linked to helpful material that has shifted in tone to be being partisan. I think that the ruling points in the opposite direction.

Now, these are all hypotheticals. I don't believe the "sky is falling", but I do think that (c)3s need to think twice about linking to other content.

I do question the fairness of holding one party responsible for the content of another party when the first party has no control over the first party's materials.