Supreme Court temporarily blocks Texas's social media moderation law
Supreme Court sides with Cruz in campaign finance caseReplayMore Videos ... (16 Videos)Supreme Court sides with Cruz in campaign finance caseThis new technology helps drones survive strong windsHow Paris Hilton became 'The Queen of the Metaverse'Google's Street View is 15 years old. See the new camera it's rolling outWhy privacy experts are warning against using period-tracking appsBig Tech and Ireland: How the combination made Ireland one of Europe's wealthiest countries This mask makes breathing in virtual reality more realisticSee how Google's new AR technology worksIn 1997, an IBM computer beat a chess world champion for the first timeIn 2005, an iPod was sold every two seconds. See how CNN covered the phenomenonHear Elon Musk's plans for Trump's Twitter banKlarna CEO on why 'buy now, pay later' works Facebook's parent company has a brick and mortar store. See what's insideBill Gates: Elon Musk 'could make Twitter worse'Elon Musk set to purchase Twitter for $44 billionWatch SpaceX and Axiom land first civilian crew back on EarthWashington (CNN Business)The Supreme Court of the United States temporarily blocked a sweeping Texas law on Tuesday that restricts the ability of Facebook, Twitter and YouTube to moderate content on their platforms. By a 5-4 vote, the justices granted an emergency request from the tech industry to block a lower court order that would have allowed the law to take hold, pending legal challenges.
In an unusual alignment the five justices in the majority were Chief Justice John Roberts, Stephen Breyer, Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett and Sonia Sotomayor. Liberal Justice Elena Kagan was joined by conservative justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, who would have denied the request.The Supreme Court order is a loss for Texas. The state argued that its law, HB 20, which prohibits large social media firms from blocking, banning or demoting posts or accounts, does not violate the First Amendment. Opponents of HB 20, including the tech industry, argued that the legislation infringes on the constitutional rights of tech platforms to make editorial decisions and to be free from government-compelled speech. Read MoreThe state argued that HB 20 does not violate the First Amendment because the law seeks to regulate tech platforms' conduct toward their users, not the companies' speech, and that it seeks to designate them as "common carriers" akin to railroads and phone companies.The wider case is viewed as a bellwether for the social media industry and could determine whether tech platforms have to scale back their content moderation in more than just Texas, and to allow a broad range of material that their terms currently prohibit. In a separate dispute, a different federal appeals court kept on hold most of a similar law out of Florida, creating a circuit split on the issue. Often, the Supreme Court is more likely to wade into a dispute if lower courts are in direct conflict. The Texas law is being challenged by advocacy groups representing the tech industry.Texas has declared open season on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube with censorship law In court papers, the groups called the law "an unprecedented assault on the editorial discretion of private websites." They warn it "would compel platforms to disseminate all sorts of objectionable viewpoints—such as Russia's propaganda claiming that its invasion of Ukraine is justified, ISIS propaganda claiming that extremism is war- ranted, neo-Nazi or KKK screeds denying or supporting the Holocaust, and encouraging children to engage in risky or unhealthy behavior like eating disorders." In response, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton had argued that HB 20 does not infringe on tech platforms' speech rights.The legal battle attracted "friend of the court" briefs from interested parties including groups such as the Anti-Defamation League and the NAACP who had urged the Court to block the law, arguing it will "transform social media platforms into online repositories of vile, graphic, harmful, hateful, and fraudulent content, of no utility to the individuals who currently engage in those communities."A group of states led by Florida also submitted a Court filing defending Texas's law. The friend-of-the-court brief, which was authored by a dozen states including Alabama, Arizona, Kentucky and South Carolina, among others, reflects how the legal battle over HB 20 has nationwide ramifications.Click Here To Get Funded!