{"id":2050275,"date":"2023-09-29T21:02:02","date_gmt":"2023-09-30T01:02:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/supreme-court-will-hear-challenges-to-social-media-laws-in-florida-and-texas\/"},"modified":"2023-09-29T21:04:35","modified_gmt":"2023-09-30T01:04:35","slug":"supreme-court-will-hear-challenges-to-social-media-laws-in-florida-and-texas","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/supreme-court-will-hear-challenges-to-social-media-laws-in-florida-and-texas\/","title":{"rendered":"Supreme Court to review social media laws in Florida and Texas."},"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%2Fsupreme-court-will-hear-challenges-to-social-media-laws-in-florida-and-texas%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=2050275&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--><blockquote>\n<p>The Supreme \u200dCourt has agreed to hear challenges to laws in Florida and Texas \u200bthat regulate how social media companies moderate content on their platforms.<\/p>\n<p>Former\u200c President Donald Trump had urged the\u200b court to hear the Florida case.<\/p>\n<p>The cases are in the\u200b public \u200deye because they pit the right of individual Americans to freely express themselves online against the right of social media platforms to make\u200c editorial decisions about the content they host. Lawyers say both rights are protected by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<h2>Related Stories<\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li>\n    <a href=\"http:\/\/www.theepochtimes.com\/us\/biden-admin-may-temporarily-keep-contacting-social-media-companies-it-has-been-accused-of-pressuring-to-censor-content-5499286?ea_src=author_manual&#038;ea_med=related_stories\"><\/p>\n<h3>Fifth Circuit Allows Biden Admin\u2063 to Continue Social Media\u2063 Contacts<\/h3>\n<p>    <\/a><\/p>\n<p class=\"text-comp-caption\">9\/27\/2023<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n    <a href=\"http:\/\/www.theepochtimes.com\/us\/california-lawmakers-approve-bill-targeting-social-media-platforms-allowing-sexual-exploitation-of-children-5497145?ea_src=author_manual&#038;ea_med=related_stories\"><\/p>\n<h3>California Lawmakers \u2064Approve Bill Targeting Social Media Platforms Allowing Sexual Exploitation of Children<\/h3>\n<p>    <\/a><\/p>\n<p class=\"text-comp-caption\">9\/22\/2023<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>The Florida case is Moody v. NetChoice LLC (court file 22-277). The Texas\u2063 case is Netchoice LLC v. Paxton (court file 22-555). NetChoice is a coalition of trade associations representing social media companies and e-commerce businesses.<\/p>\n<p>The court granted the petitions for certiorari,\u200d or\u2064 review, in both cases in unsigned orders on Sept. 29.\u2064 No \u200cjustices dissented. The court did not explain why it granted the petitions.<\/p>\n<p>Republicans and conservatives have complained \u2062for years about being censored by social media platforms. They were outraged when platforms acted in concert \u200cto ban President Trump \u200din January 2021, blocked a New York \u2063Post article about Hunter Biden\u2019s laptop, and silenced dissenting \u2064opinions about the origins\u200c of \u200bthe COVID-19 virus and on treatments for the \u200bdisease it causes.<\/p>\n<p>Democrats and liberals, on\u2062 the other hand, claim the platforms don\u2019t do enough to suppress so-called hate speech and alleged misinformation.<\/p>\n<div class=\"my-5\">\n<p>Many states \u200bare now looking at\u200c legislation that\u2062 would <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/activist-leftist-facebook-whistleblower-demands-congress-regulate-social-media-platforms\/\" title=\"Activist, Leftist Facebook Whistleblower Demands Congress Regulate Social Media Platforms\">regulate social media platforms<\/a> to protect users\u2019 free speech.<\/p>\n<h2>Cases<\/h2>\n<p>In Moody v. NetChoice, Florida is\u2063 appealing a ruling by the U.S. Court of\u2062 Appeals for the 11th Circuit that blocked portions of Florida Senate Bill 7072, which requires policy transparency and protects user\u2063 access to platforms.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, a Republican, signed \u2064the law \u200con May 24, 2021, stating that it makes sure \u201creal Floridians across the Sunshine State\u2014are \u2062guaranteed protection against the\u2064 Silicon Valley elites.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>\u201cMany in \u200bour state have experienced \u200bcensorship and other\u200c tyrannical behavior firsthand\u200b in Cuba and \u200cVenezuela. If Big Tech censors\u200c enforce rules inconsistently, to discriminate in favor of the dominant Silicon\u2064 Valley\u200c ideology, they will now be \u200dheld accountable.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Under the law, platforms are not allowed to \u2064ban political candidates and must make public \u200cand consistently\u200b apply their moderation rules. De-platforming candidates can lead to\u2063 fines of up to $250,000 a day.<\/p>\n<p>The 11th Circuit struck \u2063down part of the statute, finding that \u201cwith minor exceptions, the government\u200d can\u2019t tell a private person or entity what to say or how to say it.\u201d<\/p>\n<div class=\"post-figure\" style=\"margin-left:0;margin-right:0;max-width:1200px\">\n<figure style=\"width:640px;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto\" class=\"alignnone\"><figcaption>Former President Donald Trump speaks at a campaign rally in\u2062 Clinton Township, Mich., on Sept. 27, 2023. (Scott \u200cOlson\/Getty Images)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n<p>Even the \u201cbiggest\u201d platforms\u200c are \u201cprivate\u2062 actors whose rights the First Amendment protects \u2026 [and] their so<a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/supreme-court-will-hear-challenges-to-social-media-laws-in-florida-and-texas\/\" title=\"Supreme Court to review social media laws in Florida and Texas.\">-called content-moderation decisions\u2064 constitute protected \u200cexercises<\/a> of editorial judgment.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>In September\u2062 2022, the U.S. Court\u200d of Appeals for the 5th Circuit went \u200cin the other direction, finding \u200cthat Texas law HB 20 was constitutional and rejecting the \u201cidea \u200cthat corporations have \u2062a \u2062freewheeling First \u200dAmendment right to censor what\u2062 people say.\u201d<\/p>\n<div class=\"my-5\">\n<p>The Texas\u2063 law imposes limitations on the ability \u200dof platforms to moderate speech and requires that the\u200b companies provide disclosure to the public.<\/p>\n<h2>Trump<\/h2>\n<p>President Trump filed a friend-of-the-court brief in October 2022 urging the court to grant oral argument in Moody v. \u2062NetChoice.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>\u201cRecent experience has fostered \u2064a widespread and growing concern that behemoth social media platforms\u201d are\u200d using their \u200dpower \u200dto suppress political opposition, his brief stated.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThis concern is heightened\u2062 because Platforms often shroud decisions to exclude certain\u200d users and viewpoints in secrecy, giving no meaningful explanation as to why \u200bcertain users are excluded while others posting equivalent content are tolerated.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Ohio, Arizona, Missouri, Texas, and \u206212 \u2064other states argued in a brief that the internet is the\u2064 modern-day public square and that social media platforms engaging in censorship\u200c \u201cundermine the free exchange of ideas that\u2062 free \u2064speech protections exist to\u200d facilitate.\u201d Suppression of \u2062ideas threatens \u201cthe development of important insights and discoveries, many of which begin as fringe \u2063views.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>\u201cIf social-media \u200ccompanies are\u200b absolutely entitled to censor unpopular views, what is the limiting\u2063 principle?\u201d the brief said.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThe system cannot \u2064work if the public lacks access to the means by \u2064which \u200bcitizens\u2063 may engage with \u200beach other. Censorship by social-media companies\u2063 thus poses a very real\u200c threat\u200c to effective self-governance.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>In a\u200b brief asking the Supreme Court to leave the 11th Circuit ruling intact, NetChoice defended platforms\u2019 content-moderation \u200cpolicies.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cAnonymity and pseudonymity enabled \u2064by the Internet, coupled with the virtually cost-free \u2062ability to broadcast all manner of content, has given rise to spam, trolling, and hecklers\u2019 vetoes,\u201d the brief said.<\/p>\n<p>Websites need\u2062 to be able\u2064 to enforce \u2062\u201cpolicies directed at speech that\u2062 is offensive, objectionable, or otherwise \u2063contrary to the norms they seek to curate.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>These policies keep platforms \u201csafe and welcoming to\u200c wide audiences\u201d and prevent the \u201cincitement to violence, promotion of dangerous pranks, crank medical cures, and harassing statements,\u201d and are demanded by \u201cusers and advertisers alike.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>NetChoice and the Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA), which is also\u200c a party to the appeals, welcomed the Supreme Court\u2019s decision.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cWe are pleased the\u2064 Supreme \u200cCourt agreed\u2064 to hear our landmark cases,\u201d Chris \u2062Marchese, litigation director at NetChoice,\u2064 said in a\u200b statement.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cOnline services have a well-established First Amendment right to host,\u200c curate, and share content as they see fit. The internet is \u200ca vital\u200d platform for free expression, and it must remain free from government censorship. We are confident the Court will agree.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>CCIA President Matt Schruers said the court\u2019s \u2063decision was \u201cencouraging.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>\u201cIt \u200dis high time that the Supreme Court resolves whether governments can force websites to publish\u200b dangerous content,\u201d Mr. Schruers told The Epoch Times by email.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cTelling private websites\u200d they must give\u200b equal treatment to extremist hate isn\u2019t just unwise, it is unconstitutional,\u2063 and we look forward to demonstrating that to \u200cthe Court.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The Epoch Times reached out\u200c to the attorneys general of Texas and Florida but had not received a reply\u2064 as \u200dof press time.<\/p>\n<p> <\/p>\n<h2> How does the argument that social media platforms should not have the power to silence certain voices or suppress certain\u2064 ideas relate to the fundamental principles \u200cof\u2062 free speech?<\/h2>\n<p><span>  Poses\u2064 a significant\u200d threat to our democracy and must be addressed.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The Supreme Court&#8217;s decision to hear \u200bthese\u2063 challenges is significant because it will provide clarity on the\u2064 limits and\u200d responsibilities of social media platforms in \u2064moderating content. The\u200b outcome of these\u2062 cases could \u200bhave far-reaching implications for the future of online free speech.<\/p>\n<p>On one hand, individuals argue \u2063that social media platforms\u200c have become the modern-day public \u2064square, where people gather to express their opinions and engage in political discourse. They believe that these platforms should not\u2063 have\u200b the power to silence certain\u200c voices \u200bor suppress certain ideas. They argue that by doing so, social media companies\u2064 undermine the fundamental\u200d principles of free speech and prevent\u2062 the free exchange of ideas.<\/p>\n<p>On\u200d the other hand, \u2064social media platforms argue that they have\u200d the \u200bright\u2063 to \u200dmoderate content on their platforms in order\u200d to maintain a \u200csafe \u2062and inclusive environment. They\u2064 claim that they have a responsibility to combat hate speech, misinformation,\u2062 and other harmful \u2063content. They argue \u200dthat allowing unregulated speech \u2063could lead to the spread of harmful and dangerous ideologies.<\/p>\n<p>These cases will require the Supreme\u200c Court to carefully consider the balance between protecting free speech and <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/dhs-censorship-lead-believes-big-tech-has-moral-obligation-to-censor-the-right\/\" title=\"DHS Censorship Lead Believes Big Tech Has \"Moral Obligation\" to Censor the Right\">allowing social media platforms<\/a> to set their own content moderation policies. It is a\u2062 complex issue that \u200drequires a nuanced approach.<\/p>\n<p>Regardless of the outcome, these \u200dcases highlight the need for a\u2064 comprehensive \u200band transparent framework \u200dthat outlines the rights and responsibilities of social media<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The Supreme Court will review laws in Florida and Texas that govern social media companies&#8217; content moderation. Former President Trump pushed for the Florida case to be heard. These cases gain attention as they involve the clash between Americans&#8217; freedom of expression and social media regulations.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":168,"featured_media":2050276,"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":[543],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2050275","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-the-epoch-times"],"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\/2050275","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\/168"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2050275"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2050275\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2050276"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2050275"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2050275"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2050275"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}