Supreme Court to rule on Texas case concerning free speech, social media

AUSTIN (Nexstar) — The Supreme Court is expected to issue a decision before the end of the month in a case where tech industry groups, under NetChoice, challenged a Texas law that limits social media platforms from censoring users based on their viewpoints, highlighting significant First Amendment concerns.

The lawsuit, filed by NetChoice, arose after Governor Greg Abbott enacted a law that aims to prevent large social media platforms from censoring users based on their viewpoints, known as HB 20. NetChoice and the Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA) sued in federal court, arguing that requiring platforms to host objectionable content violates their First Amendment right to control speech on their private platforms.

Bob Corn-Revere — Chief Counsel at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression — said that constitutional protections should be extended to social media platforms.

“Social media has become the modern town square, that’s all the more reason why the government shouldn’t have control over it,” Corn-Revere said. “The more powerful medium, maybe, that’s all the more reason why the government shouldn’t be in control of how that medium can exist.”

Attorney General Ken Paxton is responsible for enforcing the Texas law that NetChoice and the CCIA are challenging. He argues HB 20 is vital in ensuring that conservative voices are not discriminantly silenced by social media companies, which he believes should be neutral towards users based on their viewpoints.

The Texas law came in response to concerns that some social media companies were discriminating against conservative viewpoints, especially in light of the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol which resulted in social media companies Facebook and Twitter suspending former president Donald Trump’s accounts citing that it glorified violence.

David Dunmoyer — the campaign director for Better Tech for Tomorrow — said that HB 20 is a transparency law. It requires social media companies to publish their moderation policies and adjudicate complaints of illegal content within 48 hours. The coalition of platforms suing over the law have called those requirements burdensome and unrealistic. Dunmoyer refuted that concern.

“When big tech companies have nearly a trillion dollars in total assets, and some of the best lawyers and attorneys in the world that are developing those rules internally to make sure it’s compliant with state policy, federal policy, they can hit publish and make that transparent to users as far as I’m concerned,” Dunmoyer said.

Between December 2021 and September 2022, the U.S. District Court representing West Texas and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued conflicting rulings: the district court sided with NetChoice, while the Court of Appeals reversed this decision and ruled in favor of Paxton.

Consequently, NetChoice and CCIA filed an emergency application to the U.S. Supreme Court in October 2022, intending to block the enforcement of HB 20. The Supreme Court’s agreement to hear the case set the stage for a major conversation on the tricky balance between free speech rights and the regulation of social media platforms.

Moody v. NetChoice, LLC , a Florida case, was heard alongside NetChoice, LLC v. Paxton for oral arguments in February. Like the Texas case, NetChoice challenged a Florida law restricting social media platforms from removing or prioritizing content based on users’ political viewpoints.

During oral arguments, the Supreme Court appeared skeptical of the laws suggesting that they violate the First Amendment because they infringe on the rights of social media companies to make decisions about the content that appears on their platforms.

The court’s session is set to end Friday, but with 6-7 cases awaiting an opinion, the Supreme Court has not confirmed that June 28 will be the final day decisions are released.

For the latest news, weather, sports, and streaming video, head to KETK.com | FOX51.com.