The Supreme Court keeps hold on efforts in Texas and Florida to regulate social media platforms
WASHINGTON — WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court blocked efforts in Texas and Florida on Monday to restrict access to Facebook, TikTok, X, YouTube and others social media platforms regulate content posted by their users.
The judges the cases were sent back to lower courts in challenges from trade associations for the companies.
While the details differ, both bills were aimed at addressing conservative complaints that the social media companies were liberal-leaning and censored users based on their views, particularly on the political right. The cases are among several this term in which the justices are grappling with free speech standards in the digital age.
The Florida and Texas laws were signed by Republican governors in the months after Facebook and Twitter, now X, decided to ban then-President Donald Trump over his posts regarding the attack of January 6, 2021 at the US Capitol his followers.
Trade associations representing the companies filed a lawsuit in federal court, claiming the laws violated the platforms’ speech rights. One federal appeals court struck down the Florida law, while another upheld the Texas law. But both were waiting pending the outcome at the Supreme Court.
In a statement as he signed the Florida measure into law, Gov. Ron DeSantis said it would be “protection against Silicon Valley elites.”
When Gov. Greg Abbott signed the Texas law, he said it was needed to protect free speech in what he called the new public square. Social media platforms “are a place for healthy public debate where information should flow freely – but there is a dangerous movement by social media companies to silence conservative views and ideas,” Abbott said. “That’s wrong, and we won’t do that. allow it in Texas.”
But a lot has changed since then. Elon Musk bought Twitter and, in addition to changing the name, eliminated teams focused on content moderation, welcomed back many users previously banned for hate speech, and used the site to spread conspiracy theories.
President Joe Biden’s administration sided with the challengers, though it cautioned the court to seek a narrow ruling that upheld governments’ ability to impose rules to protect competition, preserve data privacy and protect consumer interests. Lawyers for Trump filed a brief in the Florida case urging the high court to uphold the state law.
The cases are among many the justices have faced in the past year involving social media platforms, including a case decided last week in which the court dismissed a lawsuit filed by Louisiana, Missouri and others accuse federal officials of pressuring social media companies to silence conservative views.
During arguments in February, the judges appeared inclined to prevent the laws from taking effect. Several justices then suggested that they viewed the platforms as akin to newspapers, which enjoy broad free speech protections, rather than as telephone companies, known as common carriers, which are susceptible to broader regulation.
But two justices, Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, seemed more willing to embrace the states’ arguments. Thomas floated the idea that the companies are seeking constitutional protections for “censoring other speech.” Alito also equated the platforms’ content moderation to censorship.
The justices also raised concerns about an overly broad ruling that could impact companies that are not the primary target of the laws, including e-commerce sites such as Uber and Etsy and email and messaging services.
___
Follow the AP’s coverage of the U.S. Supreme Court https://apnews.com/hub/us-supreme-court.