On Monday, July 1, the U.S. Supreme Court held off efforts from Texas and Florida to limit how social media can regulate user content. Instead of siding with efforts from the two southern states or two major social media companies, Justice Elena Kagan argued that social media users, like news outlets, should be protected from government intervention when it comes to include or exclude user content.
“Today, we vacate both decisions for reasons separate from the First Amendment merits, because neither Court of Appeals properly considered the facial nature of NetChoice’s challenge,”Kagan wrote.
“The principle does not change because the curated compilation has gone from the physical to the virtual world,” Kagan added.
Texas and Florida’s push to limit how social media can regulate user content dates back more than three years. Following the Capitol Hill riots that took place in 2021, Facebook and X, formerly known as Twitter, cut former President Donald Trump off from their platforms. In response, Governor Greg Abbott and Governor Ron DeSantis signed laws combatting the actions taken by both platforms. Meanwhile, X and Facebook argued that the actions of Abbott and DeSantis would limit their First Amendment rights. Trade associations representing both companies hit back with lawsuits of their own, triggering a legal battle that made its way to the nation’s highest court. In the end, the Supreme Court declined to rule on the matter while offering an opinion that may bolster the legal efforts of X and Facebook.
“First, the First Amendment protects what we choose to say, but also what we choose not to say, support, or endorse. That is, the freedom of speech includes editorial judgment. This is true whether the speaker is a lone individual or a large media company,” University of Notre Dame Law School Professor Richard W. Garnett told the Associated Press.
“Second, the government is not permitted to regulate speakers simply to produce what the government thinks would be a better, or more diverse, marketplace of ideas. What’s on offer in that marketplace is, in the end, up to us.”
