{"id":2049998,"date":"2023-09-29T17:17:03","date_gmt":"2023-09-29T21:17:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/u-s-supreme-court-to-hear-cases-on-texas-florida-social-media-laws\/"},"modified":"2023-09-29T17:20:49","modified_gmt":"2023-09-29T21:20:49","slug":"u-s-supreme-court-to-hear-cases-on-texas-florida-social-media-laws","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/u-s-supreme-court-to-hear-cases-on-texas-florida-social-media-laws\/","title":{"rendered":"U.S. Supreme Court to review Texas and Florida social media laws."},"content":{"rendered":"<aside class=\"mashsb-container mashsb-main mashsb-stretched\"><div class=\"mashsb-box\"><div class=\"mashsb-count mash-medium\" style=\"&quot;\"><div class=\"counts mashsbcount\">22<\/div><span class=\"mashsb-sharetext\">SHARES<\/span><\/div><div class=\"mashsb-buttons\"><a class=\"mashicon-facebook mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservativenewsdaily.net%2Fbreaking-news%2Fu-s-supreme-court-to-hear-cases-on-texas-florida-social-media-laws%2F\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Facebook<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-twitter mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/intent\/tweet?text=&amp;url=https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/?p=2049998&amp;via=ConservNewsDly\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Twitter<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-subscribe mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"#\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Subscribe<\/span><\/a><div class=\"onoffswitch2 mash-medium mashsb-noshadow\" style=\"display:none\"><\/div><\/div>\n            <\/div>\n                <div style=\"clear:both\"><\/div><\/aside>\n            <!-- Share buttons by mashshare.net - Version: 4.0.47--><p><!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC \"-\/\/W3C\/\/DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional\/\/EN\" \"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/TR\/REC-html40\/loose.dtd\"><br \/>\n<?xml encoding=\"utf-8\" ?><?xml encoding=\"utf-8\" ?><?xml encoding=\"utf-8\" ?><html><body><\/p>\n<div class=\"entry-content\">\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-large is-resized\"><figcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">(Photo \u2063by\u2062 Al Drago\/Getty\u200d Images)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<h2>OAN\u2019s <a href=\"https:\/\/www.oann.com\/tag\/elizabeth-volberding\">Elizabeth Volberding<br \/><\/a>1:58 PM \u2013 Friday,\u200d September 29,\u200c 2023<\/h2>\n<p>The Supreme\u200d Court\u200b of the United States (SCOTUS) has made an exciting announcement. They will be hearing two cases that <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/u-s-supreme-court-to-hear-cases-on-texas-florida-social-media-laws\/\" title=\"U.S. Supreme Court to review Texas and Florida social media laws.\">involve controversial content\u2062 moderation \u200djudgments made<\/a> by social media platforms in Texas and Florida.<\/p>\n<div id=\"div-gpt-ad-1663871513696-art-1\" style=\"min-width: 320px; min-height: 50px;  text-align: center;\">  \t<script>  \t\tgoogletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('div-gpt-ad-1663871513696-art-1'); });  \t<\/script>  <\/div>\n<div class=\"ad-slot__ad-label\">Advertisement<\/div>\n<\/p>\n<p>On Friday, the Supreme Court declared that it would\u2062 prioritize free speech online \u2063and\u200d determine whether laws passed\u2062 in Texas\u2064 and Florida can restrict \u200dsocial \u2063media platforms from removing certain political posts or accounts.<\/p>\n<p>These laws aim to <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/texas-gov-abbott-joins-anti-censorship-push-against-social-media-giants\/\" title=\"Texas Gov. Abbott joins anti-censorship push against social media giants\">prevent social media companies<\/a> from banning users based\u200c on \u200ctheir political views, \u200deven if those users violate platform policies. This\u200c would limit the companies&#8217; ability\u200d to \u200cenforce their rules.<\/p>\n<p>The Supreme Court will evaluate whether the laws&#8217; \u2062&#8221;individualized-explanation requirements&#8221; and \u2063content moderation limits \u200balign \u2064with \u2063the First Amendment.<\/p>\n<p>There have been conflicting views on blocking and upholding the similar statutes in Texas and Florida from the 5th Circuit and 11th Circuit\u200c appeals\u2062 courts. As \u200da result, the \u200cSupreme Court&#8217;s\u2063 decision could\u2063 have a significant impact on online speech.<\/p>\n<p>However, two tech industry organizations, the Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA) and NetChoice, have challenged these laws\u200b in court. Members of these tech groups include Facebook and Google&#8217;s YouTube.<\/p>\n<p>They argue that these social media\u200d laws violate private companies&#8217; First Amendment right to decide what speech to \u2063host. The tech organizations are pleased that\u200c the court has decided to hear the cases.<\/p>\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote\">\n<p>&#8220;This order \u2062is encouraging. It is high time that the Supreme Court resolves whether governments can force websites to \u2063publish\u200c dangerous content. Telling private websites they must give\u2064 equal \u2062treatment to extremist hate isn&#8217;t just unwise, it is unconstitutional, and we look forward to demonstrating\u2063 that to the\u2063 Court,&#8221; said CCIA President Matt Schruers.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote\">\n<p>&#8220;Online services have a \u2062well-established First \u200bAmendment right to host,\u200c curate and share content as they \u200csee fit. The\u2064 internet is a vital \u2062platform for \u200cfree expression, and it must\u2063 remain free from government censorship. We are confident the Court will agree,&#8221; said \u200cNetChoice \u200clitigation director Chris Marchese.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>The 11th U.S. Circuit \u2062Court of Appeals sided with the tech industry groups and upheld\u2063 a block \u200con key provisions in Florida&#8217;s law. The\u200d panel \u200bemphasized that the &#8220;basic\u200c principles\u2064 of\u2062 freedom of speech\u200b and \u200bthe press&#8221; apply to private \u200ccorporations, regardless of technological development.<\/p>\n<p>However, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court \u2063of Appeals reached \u200ba different conclusion in\u200d the Texas case. Judge Andrew \u200bStephen Oldham stated that the\u2062 First Amendment does not guarantee corporations the right to \u200d&#8221;muzzle speech.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>Florida&#8217;s\u2064 Attorney General Ashley Moody \u200cstated that\u2064 the 11th\u200c Circuit&#8217;s decision conflicts with the 5th Circuit&#8217;s judgment for Texas. The trade\u200d associations\u200d have appealed to the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n<p>Nearly four \u200bof \u2064the nine justices agreed to\u200d take up \u200cthe cases, which was a surprising decision considering their previous interest. In \u2063May of last year, the\u2063 Supreme Court halted the enforcement of the Texas law\u2063 while the 5th Circuit reviewed the matter.<\/p>\n<p>Justice \u2064Samuel Alito, Justice \u2062Clarence Thomas,\u2064 and Justice\u200b Neil \u200dGorsuch believed that\u2063 the case presented &#8220;novel\u200c legal questions&#8221; of great importance that warranted the Court&#8217;s review.<\/p>\n<p>Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar \u200dchallenged the 5th Circuit&#8217;s decision to\u2064 uphold the Texas\u200c law,\u200b suggesting\u200b that the differing views necessitate a Supreme\u2062 Court review.<\/p>\n<p>Stay informed! Subscribe here to <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/xi-jinping-and-vladimir-putin-meet-in-kremlin\/\" title=\"Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin meet in Kremlin\">receive breaking news blasts directly<\/a> to your inbox for free: <a href=\"https:\/\/www.oann.com\/alerts\">https:\/\/www.oann.com\/alerts<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div class=\"entry-content\">\n<p>45th President Donald Trump&#8217;s legal team is \u200crequesting an extension in special \u2063counsel Jack Smith&#8217;s January 6th case.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div class=\"entry-content\">\n<p>President Trump&#8217;s presence dominated \u2064the second Republican primary debate in California Wednesday night. \u200b <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div class=\"entry-content\">\n<p>Key witnesses appearing in the House Oversight Committee hearing today in the first Biden Impeachment Inquiry seemed to support the GOP-led investigation into \u200bBiden corruption. <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div class=\"entry-content\">\n<p>Philadelphia experienced a second night of mass lootings. <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div class=\"entry-content\">\n<p>By\u00a0Andrew Chung September 29, 2023 \u2013 8:04 AM PDT Advertisement Sept 29 (Reuters) \u2013 The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday agreed to\u2026 <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div class=\"entry-content\">\n<p>By\u00a0Padraic \u200bHalpin\u00a0and\u00a0Max\u200d A.\u200c Cherney September 29, 2023 \u2013 5:02 AM PDT\u2063 Advertisement DUBLIN, Sept 29 (Reuters) \u2013\u200b Chipmaker Intel\u00a0(INTC.O)\u00a0said\u2062 on Friday it\u2026 <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div class=\"entry-content\">\n<p>By\u00a0Supantha Mukherjee September \u206429, 2023 \u2013 5:12\u2064 AM PDT Advertisement STOCKHOLM,\u2063 Sept 29 (Reuters) \u2013 A raid \u2064by French\u2064 authorities of the\u2026 <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div class=\"entry-content\">\n<p>LONDON (Reuters) -The European Commission launched an\u200c investigation \u2064on \u2063Wednesday into\u2064 whether to \u200cimpose punitive tariffs to protect European \u2062Union automakers against\u2026 <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<p> rnrn  <\/p>\n<h2> What are\u2063 the potential implications \u2064of the Supreme Court&#8217;s decision to hear cases regarding content moderation on social media platforms?<\/h2>\n<p><span>  Rtance \u200dand merited the Court&#8217;s attention. The \u2062decision to hear these cases comes \u200dafter months of debate and discussion surrounding the issue \u2063of content moderation on social media platforms.<\/p>\n<p>The laws in question, passed in Texas and Florida, aim to \u2062restrict social media platforms from \u200bremoving certain political posts or accounts based on \u2063users&#8217; political views, even if those users\u200b violate platform policies. These laws have sparked \u2064intense \u2063debate and legal challenges, with conflicting opinions from different appeals \u200ccourts.<\/p>\n<p>The Supreme Court&#8217;s decision to hear these cases will\u2062 have \u2062significant\u2062 implications\u2064 for online speech and \u200cthe power of social media companies to \u2062regulate content on \u2064their platforms. It will also\u2064 determine whether the \u200dlaws&#8217; requirements for &#8220;individualized-explanation&#8221; and content moderation limits align \u2064with the First Amendment&#8217;s protection of free speech.<\/p>\n<p>Tech industry\u200b organizations such\u200d as the Computer \u200dand Communications Industry Association \u2064(CCIA) and NetChoice have challenged these laws in\u2063 court. They\u2063 argue that these\u2064 laws violate the First Amendment\u2062 rights of private companies to decide what speech to host on their \u2064platforms. These organizations\u2062 are pleased that the Supreme Court has decided \u2062to \u2064examine\u200c the cases, as they \u2063believe it will reaffirm\u200b the importance of free expression\u2064 on the \u200binternet.<\/p>\n<p>The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has already \u200dsided with the tech industry groups, upholding a \u200cblock on\u200b key provisions in Florida&#8217;s law. They emphasized that\u2062 the principles\u200c of freedom of speech and the press apply to\u2064 private\u2064 corporations, regardless of technological \u2064development. However,\u2064 the 5th U.S. \u200cCircuit Court of Appeals reached \u200ba different conclusion\u200d in the Texas \u2064case, stating that the First \u200dAmendment does not guarantee corporations the \u2063right to &#8220;muzzle\u2064 speech.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>This conflicting judgment between \u200ccircuits has led to a legal dispute, with trade\u2062 associations appealing to the Supreme Court to provide clarity and consistency in the interpretation of the First \u200bAmendment in relation to <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/twitter-cannot-be-saved-its-time-for-free-speech-proponents-to-let-it-die\/\" title=\"Twitter Cannot Be Saved. It\u2019s Time For Free Speech Proponents To Let It Die\">social media content moderation<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>The decision\u200d by \u200cthe Supreme Court to take up these \u200dcases is unexpected,\u2063 as they had previously halted \u200cthe enforcement of the Texas law last year. Justices Samuel Alito, \u2063Clarence Thomas, \u200cand Neil \u2064Gorsuch\u200c believe \u2063that the cases present novel legal questions that warrant the \u2064Court&#8217;s attention.<\/p>\n<p>The Supreme Court&#8217;s ruling on these \u200bcases will not only have\u200b significant implications \u200dfor \u200cthe future of \u200bcontent moderation\u2063 on social media platforms but also\u200c for\u200d the broader interpretation of\u2062 the First Amendment in the\u2063 digital age. The Court&#8217;s decision will undoubtedly\u2064 shape the landscape of online speech \u200dand the role of social media in\u2064 shaping public discourse.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The US Supreme Court (SCOTUS) will review two cases on content moderation decisions made by social media platforms in Texas and Florida. The court&#8217;s decision to hear these controversial cases was announced on Friday, emphasizing the importance of free speech in the digital realm.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2368,"featured_media":2049999,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mo_disable_npp":"","fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/cndimages.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com\/breaking-news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/IMG_2758-scaled-1.jpg","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[542],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2049998","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-oann"],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/cndimages.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com\/breaking-news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/IMG_2758-scaled-1.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2049998","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2368"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2049998"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2049998\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2049999"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2049998"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2049998"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2049998"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}