Conflicting lower court rulings on removing controversial material from social media point toward a landmark Supreme Court decision on whether the First Amendment protects Big Tech’s editorial discretion or forbids its censorship of unpopular views.
. “These massive corporate entities cannot continue to go unchecked as they silence the voices of millions of Americans.”But a unanimous panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit went the other way earlier this year, saying that a similar Florida law violated constitutional protections for tech companies that do not want to host views on their platforms that they find hateful, divisive or false.
It is possible such guidance will come soon, perhaps in the term that begins next month. Disagreements among lower courts about important legal issues is the most likely driver of the Supreme Court’s decision to take up a case, and Florida’s petition challenging the 11th Circuit ruling is due at the high court Wednesday.
“That Amendment, of course, protects every person’s right to ‘the freedom of speech,’ ” Oldham wrote. “But the platforms argue that buried somewhere in the person’s enumerated right to free speech lies a corporation’sGenerally, legal experts closely tracking the case said the 5th Circuit decision is at odds with long-standing court precedent and warned that the Texas law would force the companies to disseminate what they consider misinformation and harmful content on their platforms.
The liberals on the court dissented on the specifics of the case but seemed to agree on the rights of private companies. “There are purely private spaces, where the First Amendment is inapplicable,” wrote Justice Sonia Sotomayor. “The First Amendment leaves a private store owner , for example, free to remove a customer for expressing unwanted views.”
Some laws that would be unconstitutional as applied to news outlets and their publishing decisions, Jaffer suggested, may be permitted when it comes to social media platforms. A social media company could be required, for instance, to explain its decision to remove someone from its platform or to be more transparent about how it moderates content.
Australia Latest News, Australia Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Texas Beats Silicon Valley: Federal Court Upholds Law Banning Social Media CensorshipA federal appeals court has upheld a Texas law allowing users to sue social media platforms in the event of wrongful account suspension, in a win for defenders of free speech online.
Read more »
Federal appeals court upholds controversial Texas social media lawThe law bars big platforms from removing content if doing so discriminates against a 'viewpoint.'
Read more »
Twitter Explodes Over Bears Goal Line Shotgun Play Call for Justin FieldsSocial media reactions from Justin Fields’ failed goal-line attempt out of the shotgun formation.
Read more »
How social media is literally making teens mentally illA psychologist reveals how social media is literally making teens mentally ill.
Read more »