The legality of Republican-backed state laws in Texas and Florida that constrain the ability of social media companies to curb content on their platforms that these businesses deem objectionable is to be weighed by the US Supreme Court.
Reuters reports that the court agreed last week to decide the legality of these laws.
The court will consider challenges by technology industry groups who argued that the 2021 laws in Texas and Florida restricting the content-moderation practices of large social media platforms violate the US Constitution’s First Amendment protections for freedom of speech.
Lower courts split on the issue, striking down key provisions of Florida’s law while upholding the Texas measure.
Reuters reports that the industry challengers to the laws are NetChoice and the Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA), industry groups whose members include Facebook parent Meta Platforms, Alphabet’s Google, which owns YouTube, as well as TikTok and X, formerly called Twitter.
It quotes CCIA president Matt Schruers as saying: ‘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.’
Supporters of the laws have argued that social media platforms have engaged in impermissible censorship and have silenced conservative voices in particular. Advocates of content moderation have argued for the need to stop misinformation and the amplification of extremist causes.
According to Reuters, President Joe Biden’s administration said in court papers that the cases merited review because the state laws burdened the rights of the companies.
The justice department said: ‘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 industry groups argue that the First Amendment protects the editorial discretion of social media platforms and prohibits governments from forcing companies 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.
On the other hand, conservative critics of social media platforms and the companies that run them have cited as an example of what they called censorship the decision by the platform previously called Twitter to suspend then-president Donald Trump shortly after the January 2021 attack on the US Capitol by his supporters, with the company citing ‘the risk of further incitement of violence’.
Trump’s account has since been reinstated under Elon Musk, who now owns the renamed company.
According to Reuters, Florida is seeking to revive its law after the Atlanta-based 11th US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled largely against it. The industry groups are appealing a decision by the New Orleans-based fifth US Circuit Court of Appeals upholding the Texas law, which the Supreme Court had blocked at an earlier stage of the case.
The Florida and Texas cases are due to be heard in the court’s new nine-month term, beginning today.
[Image: 愚木混株 Cdd20 from Pixabay]