President Joe Biden’s administration urged the U.S. Supreme Court to take up a dispute over Republican-backed laws in Texas and Florida that would undercut efforts by social media companies to curb content deemed objectionable on their platforms.
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 (META.O) Alphabet Inc (GOOGL.O), and X, formerly known as Twitter….
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.
You can find the SG’s brief here. The SG frames 4 questions presented, and urges the Justices to hear only questions 1 and 2 but NOT 3 and 4:
These cases concern laws enacted by Florida and Texas to regulate major social media platforms like Facebook, YouTube, and X (formerly known as Twitter).
The two laws differ in some respects, but both restrict platforms’ ability to engage in content moderation by removing, editing, or arranging user-generated content; require platforms to provide individualized explanations for certain forms of content moderation; and require general disclosures about platforms’ content-moderation practices. The questions presented are:
- Whether the laws’ content-moderation restrictions comply with the First Amendment.
- Whether the laws’ individualized-explanation requirements comply with the First Amendment.
- Whether the laws’ general-disclosure provisions comply with the First Amendment.
- Whether the laws violate the First Amendment because they were motivated by viewpoint discrimination.