This is a fascinating topic.
I think the trouble you will run into, is that people expect free speech to exist across public internet platforms.
With their speech having been violated, scorned, and silenced, they are looking for vengeance against those who are their "other". They want to strike back and this is exactly it.
Disney, as a corporation, has 1st amendment protections.
Corporations having both protection and control over is a curious position for them to hold, for anyone concerned that our nation has gone to / is run by Corporations. To anyone who wonders if our politicians are too beholden to them, their lobbyists, and their donations. Those who write politician's checks are free to speak, and free to silence people. Of course we cheer when Corporations silence the correct people. And in this topic we grow angry when the people, through their government, strike back.
Is it the place of the Government to be used in this way?
Disney certainly has a strong case and I would not begrudge any who judge in their favor.
As for myself, I would like to hear what a Court has to say on the matter. It is too technical a matter, whether a legislature revoking a special status is illegal based on motive. It begs the question of what the underlying principles are and I cannot claim that I know them. Can the legislature wait one year, or another term holding office? Can they do it after the next election? Surely it is not beyond their power to perform this action, it is merely their motive in question. How long does their motive hold more importance and block their desired action, than their right to perform this action in the first place? I do not know how it all breaks down in a legal sense.
And while I favor free speech, I am also seeing what happens as a result of our speech being misused. One might argue American Corporations have entered that fight and are doing good work on our behalf. But then, why should they get to dictate? And if not them... who?
There are serious and unresolved issues over modern speech.