Supreme Court justices sounded hesitant Monday to dismiss First Amendment concerns about state laws that would restrict social media companies' ability to moderate users' posts. The court spent four hours hearing oral arguments about laws passed in Florida and Texas that are blocked for now, the New York Times reports. Both laws were approved by Republican-controlled legislatures, a response to complaints from the political right that the companies were censoring comments from its supporters while allowing posts expressing other viewpoints. The court's decisions could have broad implications for the future of online debate.
A series of issues involved includes censorship and whether to treat social media like a phone company that transmits users' content and can't block any of it at will, or like a newspaper, which can decide what opinions it will run. The Florida law is the more sweeping, and Justice Sonia Sotomayor said it could keep the online marketplace Etsy from curating items being sold by its users, per CNN. "This is so, so broad, it's covering almost everything" on the internet, Sotomayor said. President Biden's administration agrees with the technology companies that say the platforms have the right to moderate content; Donald Trump's lawyers filed a brief calling on the court to uphold Florida's law.
In musing about censorship, Justices Samuel Alito and Brett Kavanaugh brought up George Orwell, per MSNBC. Alito expressed concern about "Orwellian" private conduct, while Kavanaugh said he thinks of government control of media, not private control, as being "Orwellian." Alito expressed dislike of the term "content moderation," per the AP. "Is it anything more than a euphemism for censorship?" Alito asked. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson brought up whether the platforms are a public square or a private company. A ruling should be issued by summer. (More US Supreme Court stories.)
,
uBlock 
,
and
Ghostery 
)
