U.S. Supreme Court seeks Biden administration view on Florida, Texas
social media laws
Send a link to a friend
[January 24, 2023]
By Andrew Chung
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday asked President Joe Biden's
administration to weigh in on whether it should review Republican-backed
laws in Texas and Florida that would undercut efforts by major social
media companies to curb content deemed objectionable on their platforms,
actions the states call impermissible censorship.
The justices are considering taking up two cases involving challenges to
the state laws - both currently blocked - brought by technology industry
groups NetChoice and the Computer & Communications Industry Association
that count Twitter, Meta Platforms Inc's Facebook and Alphabet Inc's
YouTube as members.
Supporters of the laws have argued that social media platforms have
silenced conservative voices while advocates for the judicious use of
curbing content 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 had
blocked at an earlier stage of the case.
The cases would test the argument made by the industry groups that the
U.S. Constitution's First Amendment guarantee of free speech protects
the right of social media platforms to editorial discretion and
prohibits the government from forcing them to publish and disseminate
content against their will, or disclose internal content moderation
processes.
The companies have said that without editorial discretion their websites
would be overrun with spam, bullying, extremism and hate speech.
[to top of second column]
|
The U.S. Supreme Court building is seen
in Washington, U.S., June 27, 2022. REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz
The Republican states passed their laws in 2021 in response to a
view articulated by many U.S. conservatives and right-wing
commentators that large technology companies - sometimes called Big
Tech - regularly suppress their views.
These people cite as an example Twitter's move to permanently
suspend of Republican then-President Donald Trump from the platform
in the aftermath of the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol by
a mob of his supporters, with the company citing "the risk of
further incitement of violence."
Florida's law requires platforms with at least 100 million users to
"host some speech that they might otherwise prefer not to host" by
disclosing censorship rules and applying them "in a consistent
manner among its users." It also prohibits the banning of any
political candidates.
The Texas law forbids social media companies with at least 50
million monthly active users from acting to "censor" users based on
"viewpoint."
The New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in 2022
upheld the Texas law, concluding that it "chills no speech
whatsoever. To the extent it chills anything, it chills censorship."
The Atlanta-based 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in 2022
rejected most of Florida's law but upheld the legality of the
provisions requiring websites to make certain disclosures, including
content moderation standards and rule changes.
(Reporting by Andrew Chung; Editing by Will Dunham and Jonathan
Oatis)
[© 2023 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content. |