The Supreme Court on Monday appeared to have deep concerns of state laws enacted in Florida and Texas that would prohibit social media platforms from throttling certain political viewpoints, CNN reported.
The high-stakes battle gives the nation’s highest court an enormous say in how millions of Americans get their news and information, as well as whether sites such as Facebook, Instagram, YouTube and TikTok should be able to make their own decisions about how to moderate spam, hate speech, and election misinformation.
According to CNN, the state laws ban online platforms from removing posts that express opinions, such as political content. States say the laws are necessary to keep the social media platforms from discriminating against conservatives.
At least at this stage of the case, however, it’s unclear how the justices will rule. Several of the justices were unsettled by the possibility that the laws could be applied to other sites, like Uber, without violating the Constitution. Some of the nine, meanwhile, signaled a desire to send the case back down to lower courts for further review about the potential sweep of the laws’ provisions beyond social media platforms.
NPR reported that the Supreme Court wrestled Monday with a pair of cases that could help define the future of the internet.
Legal experts say they’re the most important First Amendment cases in a generation. The question is whether states like Florida and Texas can force big social media platforms to carry content the platforms find hateful or objectionable.
According to NPR, Republicans in Florida and Texas took action, signing sweeping laws that prevent the largest platforms from banning users based on their political viewpoints and require them to provide an individual explanation to users about why their posts have been edited or removed.
NBC News eported that the Supreme Court on Monday grappled with knotty free speech questions as it weighted laws in Florida and Texas that seek to impose restrictions on the ability of social media companies to moderate content.
According to NBC News, after almost four hours of oral arguments, a majority of the justices appeared skeptical that states can prohibit platforms from barring or limiting the reach of some problematic users without violating the free speech rights of the companies.
But justices from across the ideological spectrum raised fears about the power and influence of big social media platforms like YouTube and Facebook and questioned whether the laws should be blocked entirely.
In my opinion, the Supreme Court justices are going to take some time before they come to a conclusion about what to do with the cases from Florida and Texas. Eventually, they will either release their decision or choose to not step into this particular case.