The
states call the actions impermissible censorship.
The justices are considering taking up two cases involving
challenges to the state laws brought by technology industry
groups including NetChoice, whose members include Meta Platforms
Inc Alphabet Inc, and X, formerly known as Twitter.
Supporters of the laws, passed in 2021, have argued that social
media platforms have silenced conservative voices, while
advocates of content moderation have argued for the need to stop
misinformation and advocacy for extremist causes.
Florida is seeking to revive its law after a lower court ruled
largely against it, while the industry groups are appealing a
separate lower court decision upholding the Texas law, which the
Supreme Court blocked at an earlier stage of the case.
Invited to weigh in on the dispute, the Justice Department on
Monday said the cases merit review because the laws burden the
platforms' rights under the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment,
which protects freedom of speech.
"When a social-media platform selects, edits, and arranges
third-party speech for presentation to the public, it engages in
activity protected by the First Amendment," the Justice
Department said in a written brief.
The cases would test the argument made by the industry groups
that the First Amendment protects platforms' editorial
discretion and prohibits governments from forcing them to
publish content against their will.
The companies have said that without editorial discretion their
websites would be overrun with spam, bullying, extremism and
hate speech.
Florida's law requires large platforms to "host some speech that
they might otherwise prefer not to host" by disclosing
censorship rules and prohibiting the banning of any political
candidates. Texas' law forbids censoring users based on
"viewpoint."
(Reporting by Andrew Chung in New York; Editing by Sonali Paul)
[© 2023 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] Copyright 2022 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content.
|
|