The US Supreme Court ruled on Monday (July 1) to send two cases back to lower courts for further review. These two cases concern the laws in Texas and Florida that regulate the content moderation policies of social media platforms, thus avoiding a direct decision on the legality of the two state laws.
In the rulings issued on the final day of this court session, the Supreme Court ordered the lower courts to reconsider these two appeals to determine whether the laws in Texas and Florida restrict the freedom of speech that tech companies owning social media platforms are entitled to, a right granted by the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
The justices determined that the lower courts did not fully assess the potential impact of the First Amendment and instructed them to conduct further analysis on the cases.
These laws enacted in 2021 authorize the Texas and Florida governments to oversee the content moderation practices of large social media platforms. However, these laws have been challenged by two tech industry groups, including the Computer and Communications Industry Association and the NetChoice, which count members such as Meta Platforms, the parent company of Facebook, and Google-owned YouTube under Alphabet.
Although both cases involve the intersection of the First Amendment of the US Constitution and online speech, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals had previously issued conflicting decisions on whether to block or uphold these similar laws in Florida and Texas.
The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision upheld the lower court’s injunction against the major provisions of Florida’s law, supporting the tech industry organizations’ stance on freedom of speech.
On the other hand, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in the Texas case that the First Amendment does not guarantee corporations the right to “restrict speech that they do not like,” thereby supporting Texas’ measures.
Due to the litigation, neither of these laws has been enforced.
The Biden administration opposes the laws in Florida and Texas, arguing that the restrictions on content moderation violate the First Amendment.
Officials from Florida and Texas, however, argue that the actions of these companies in controlling platform content are not within the protections of the First Amendment because such actions are not speech in themselves.
Another issue raised in the cases is that the state laws require social media companies to provide personalized explanations to users regarding certain content moderation decisions, including posts being removed from their platforms, raising questions about whether this imposes an unlawful burden on the freedom of speech of these companies.