WASHINGTON, July 1 (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court is
expected on Monday to rule on the legality of Republican-backed
laws in Florida and Texas intended to restrain social media
companies from curbing content the platforms deem objectionable
- statutes the industry has argued violate the free speech
rights of these businesses.
The justices have been asked to decide whether the two laws
run afoul of protections under the U.S. Constitution's First
Amendment against government restriction of speech, as the
industry argued, by interfering with the editorial discretion of
social media companies. The 2021 laws would put limits on
content-moderation practices by large social media platforms.
The Supreme Court has set Monday as its final day for
decisions in its current term, which began in October.
The laws were challenged by tech industry trade groups
NetChoice and the Computer & Communications Industry Association
(CCIA), whose members include Facebook parent Meta Platforms ( META )
, Alphabet's Google, which owns YouTube, as
well as TikTok and Snapchat owner Snap.
Lower courts split on the issue, blocking key provisions of
Florida's law while upholding the Texas measure. Neither law has
gone into effect due to the litigation.
At issue was whether the First Amendment protects the
editorial discretion of the social media platforms and prohibits
governments from forcing companies to publish content against
their will. The companies have said that without such discretion
- including the ability to block or remove content or users,
prioritize certain posts over others or include additional
context - their websites would be overrun with spam, bullying,
extremism and hate speech.
Many Republicans have argued that social media platforms
stifle conservative voices in the guise of content moderation,
branding this as censorship.
President Joe Biden's administration opposed the Florida and
Texas laws, arguing that the content-moderation restrictions
violate the First Amendment by forcing platforms to present and
promote content they view as objectionable.
Officials from Florida and Texas countered that the
content-moderation actions by these companies fall outside the
protection of the First Amendment because such conduct is not
itself speech.
The Texas law would forbid social media companies with at
least 50 million monthly active users from acting to "censor"
users based on "viewpoint," and allows either users or the Texas
attorney general to sue to enforce it.
Florida's law would constrain the ability of large platforms
to exclude certain content by prohibiting the censorship or
banning of a political candidate or "journalistic enterprise."
Another issue presented in the cases was whether the state
laws unlawfully burden the free speech rights of social media
companies by requiring them to provide users with individualized
explanations for certain content-moderation decisions, including
the removal of posts from their platforms.
This is not the first time the Supreme Court has addressed
free speech rights in the digital age during its current term.
The justices on March 15 decided that government officials
can sometimes be sued under the First Amendment for blocking
critics on social media. In another case, the justices on June
26 declined to impose limits on the way Biden's administration
may communicate with social media platforms, rejecting a First
Amendment challenge to how U.S. officials encouraged the removal
of posts deemed misinformation, including about elections and
COVID.
Florida sought to revive its law after the Atlanta-based
11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled largely against it. The
industry groups appealed a decision by the New Orleans-based 5th
U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upholding the Texas law, which the
Supreme Court blocked at an earlier stage of the case.
Conservative critics of "Big Tech" companies 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 Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S.
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 company renamed X. Trump is the Republican
candidate challenging Biden, a Democrat, in the Nov. 5 U.S.
election.