U.S. Supreme Court to review Texas and Florida social media laws.
OAN’s Elizabeth Volberding
1:58 PM – Friday, September 29, 2023
The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) has made an exciting announcement. They will be hearing two cases that involve controversial content moderation judgments made by social media platforms in Texas and Florida.
On Friday, the Supreme Court declared that it would prioritize free speech online and determine whether laws passed in Texas and Florida can restrict social media platforms from removing certain political posts or accounts.
These laws aim to prevent social media companies from banning users based on their political views, even if those users violate platform policies. This would limit the companies’ ability to enforce their rules.
The Supreme Court will evaluate whether the laws’ ”individualized-explanation requirements” and content moderation limits align with the First Amendment.
There have been conflicting views on blocking and upholding the similar statutes in Texas and Florida from the 5th Circuit and 11th Circuit appeals courts. As a result, the Supreme Court’s decision could have a significant impact on online speech.
However, two tech industry organizations, the Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA) and NetChoice, have challenged these laws in court. Members of these tech groups include Facebook and Google’s YouTube.
They argue that these social media laws violate private companies’ First Amendment right to decide what speech to host. The tech organizations are pleased that the court has decided to hear the cases.
“This order is encouraging. It is high time that the Supreme Court resolves whether governments can force websites to publish dangerous content. Telling private websites they must give equal treatment to extremist hate isn’t just unwise, it is unconstitutional, and we look forward to demonstrating that to the Court,” said CCIA President Matt Schruers.
“Online services have a well-established First Amendment right to host, curate and share content as they see fit. The internet is a vital platform for free expression, and it must remain free from government censorship. We are confident the Court will agree,” said NetChoice litigation director Chris Marchese.
The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the tech industry groups and upheld a block on key provisions in Florida’s law. The panel emphasized that the “basic principles of freedom of speech and the press” apply to private corporations, regardless of technological development.
However, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reached a different conclusion in the Texas case. Judge Andrew Stephen Oldham stated that the First Amendment does not guarantee corporations the right to ”muzzle speech.”
Florida’s Attorney General Ashley Moody stated that the 11th Circuit’s decision conflicts with the 5th Circuit’s judgment for Texas. The trade associations have appealed to the Supreme Court.
Nearly four of the nine justices agreed to take up the cases, which was a surprising decision considering their previous interest. In May of last year, the Supreme Court halted the enforcement of the Texas law while the 5th Circuit reviewed the matter.
Justice Samuel Alito, Justice Clarence Thomas, and Justice Neil Gorsuch believed that the case presented “novel legal questions” of great importance that warranted the Court’s review.
Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar challenged the 5th Circuit’s decision to uphold the Texas law, suggesting that the differing views necessitate a Supreme Court review.
Stay informed! Subscribe here to receive breaking news blasts directly to your inbox for free: https://www.oann.com/alerts
45th President Donald Trump’s legal team is requesting an extension in special counsel Jack Smith’s January 6th case.
President Trump’s presence dominated the second Republican primary debate in California Wednesday night.
Key witnesses appearing in the House Oversight Committee hearing today in the first Biden Impeachment Inquiry seemed to support the GOP-led investigation into Biden corruption.
Philadelphia experienced a second night of mass lootings.
By Andrew Chung September 29, 2023 – 8:04 AM PDT Advertisement Sept 29 (Reuters) – The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday agreed to…
By Padraic Halpin and Max A. Cherney September 29, 2023 – 5:02 AM PDT Advertisement DUBLIN, Sept 29 (Reuters) – Chipmaker Intel (INTC.O) said on Friday it…
By Supantha Mukherjee September 29, 2023 – 5:12 AM PDT Advertisement STOCKHOLM, Sept 29 (Reuters) – A raid by French authorities of the…
LONDON (Reuters) -The European Commission launched an investigation on Wednesday into whether to impose punitive tariffs to protect European Union automakers against…
rnrn
What are the potential implications of the Supreme Court’s decision to hear cases regarding content moderation on social media platforms?
Rtance and merited the Court’s attention. The decision to hear these cases comes after months of debate and discussion surrounding the issue of content moderation on social media platforms.
The laws in question, passed in Texas and Florida, aim to restrict social media platforms from removing certain political posts or accounts based on users’ political views, even if those users violate platform policies. These laws have sparked intense debate and legal challenges, with conflicting opinions from different appeals courts.
The Supreme Court’s decision to hear these cases will have significant implications for online speech and the power of social media companies to regulate content on their platforms. It will also determine whether the laws’ requirements for “individualized-explanation” and content moderation limits align with the First Amendment’s protection of free speech.
Tech industry organizations such as the Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA) and NetChoice have challenged these laws in court. They argue that these laws violate the First Amendment rights of private companies to decide what speech to host on their platforms. These organizations are pleased that the Supreme Court has decided to examine the cases, as they believe it will reaffirm the importance of free expression on the internet.
The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has already sided with the tech industry groups, upholding a block on key provisions in Florida’s law. They emphasized that the principles of freedom of speech and the press apply to private corporations, regardless of technological development. However, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reached a different conclusion in the Texas case, stating that the First Amendment does not guarantee corporations the right to “muzzle speech.”
This conflicting judgment between circuits has led to a legal dispute, with trade associations appealing to the Supreme Court to provide clarity and consistency in the interpretation of the First Amendment in relation to social media content moderation.
The decision by the Supreme Court to take up these cases is unexpected, as they had previously halted the enforcement of the Texas law last year. Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, and Neil Gorsuch believe that the cases present novel legal questions that warrant the Court’s attention.
The Supreme Court’s ruling on these cases will not only have significant implications for the future of content moderation on social media platforms but also for the broader interpretation of the First Amendment in the digital age. The Court’s decision will undoubtedly shape the landscape of online speech and the role of social media in shaping public discourse.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
