The US Supreme Court asked the Biden administration for input on Florida and Texas laws that would sharply restrict the editorial discretion of the largest social media platforms in a First Amendment showdown.
Two industry groups are challenging the Republican-backed laws, saying they would impose onerous requirements and put platforms at risk of being overrun by spam and bullying. The Texas law bars large platforms from discriminating based on viewpoint, while the Florida statute requires a “thorough rationale” for every content-moderation decision.
Texas, Florida and the trade associations — which represent
The laws “pose a grave threat to how social media websites provide their services to users,” trade groups NetChoice LLC and the Computer & Communications Industry Association argued in the Florida case. “People use social media websites, and companies advertise on them, precisely because websites spend significant time and resources organizing, presenting, and sorting the vast amount of information on their services.”
Abbott decried “a dangerous movement by social media companies to silence conservative viewpoints and ideas” when he signed the Texas measure into law four months later.
The justices directed their request to Solicitor General
In a separate social media case, the court on Monday
The Atlanta-based 11th US Circuit Court of Appeals blocked most of Florida’s law as probably violating the First Amendment. The New Orleans-based 5th Circuit upheld the Texas law in September but left the measure on hold to allow time for an appeal to the Supreme Court.
Texas’s ban on viewpoint-discrimination is the most sweeping of the disputed provisions. The prohibition includes a handful of exceptions, letting platforms bar content that incites violence or criminal activity or concerns the sexual exploitation of children or harassment of sexual-abuse survivors.
The Texas law also imposes a number of operational and disclosure requirements. The law sets out procedures for user complaints, requires companies to disclose their content- and data-management practices and publish a sweeping biannual “transparency report.”
The law applies to platforms with more than 50 million monthly users, a threshold that exempts conservative social media sites such as Parler and Gab.
The Florida law includes a dozen major provisions, including the requirement that platforms provide a detailed explanation of any decision that “deplatforms,” “censors” or “shadow bans” any user. The 11th Circuit called that provision “particularly onerous.”
The law also bars platforms from banning political candidates or “journalistic enterprises.” As with Texas, the Florida law applies only to the biggest social media companies.
The state has the support of former President
(Adds description of laws, legal issues starting in third paragraph.)
To contact the reporter on this story:
To contact the editors responsible for this story:
© 2023 Bloomberg L.P. All rights reserved. Used with permission.