Fifth Circuit Upholds Texas Social Media Law

Lawfare ^ | Sept 16, 2022 | Quinta Jurecic

[libstripper]

On Sept. 16, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit handed down a long-awaited ruling in NetChoice v. Paxton, upholding the constitutionality of a Texas law that greatly restricts the ability of large social media platforms to moderate content and imposes certain transparency requirements. NetChoice, a trade association, challenged the legislation on First Amendment grounds.

The Fifth Circuit had previously stayed a preliminary injunction against the law issued by a district court, only for the Supreme Court to vacate the stay. In its ruling today finding the legislation constitutional, the appeals court found a key provision limiting content moderation practices to be acceptable under the First Amendment because it "does not chill speech; instead, it chills censorship."

The court's ruling is available below.

[libstripper]

This is a really big decision because it blows the idea of big tech companies being entirely private entities that are protected by the First Amendment in their censorship practices totally out of the water. When combined with the current litigation that's been filed by the Missouri Atty. Gen. and the Atty. Gen. for, I believe, Louisiana, where the discovery is showing that big tech companies are essentially neofascist organizations, it leads inevitably to their supervision as public utilities where they won't be allowed to do any censorship of opinions. The full text of the opinion is included with this article, is a bit over 100 pages long, and follows immediately after the excerpted line that says, "the court's ruling is available below."

[for-q-clinton]

Does this mean people in Texas can sue if they had content deleted or went to the facebook/twitter gulag for political posts?

If so I need to move to texas and I can make a fortune.

[SauronOfMordor]

I see a market for VPN providers based in Texas.

[for-q-clinton]

Yep. The law says you have to live in Texas, but Facebook doesn’t need to know that.

However, I bet they start making people in Texas provide an ID proving they live in Texas.

[libstripper]

Please see the bottom of page 4 of the included opinion. Section 7 of the Texas statute provides that an aggrieved person may sue for declaratory and injunctive relief including court costs and attorneys fees. However, there is no provision for an individual to sue for monetary damages.

[eeriegeno]

where the discovery is showing that big tech companies are essentially neofascist organizations, it leads inevitably to their supervision as public utilities

They are indeed public utilities and should be regulated as such. A telephone company would never have denied service because they didn't like what a customer said on their equipment!

[SauronOfMordor]

How about people visiting in Texas?

[for-q-clinton]

Not based on what I read :-(

[for-q-clinton]

I’ll get a Texas Law License ;-)

[nwrep]

This is a brilliantly written opinion that turns the table on liberals, throws back their "whataboutisms" argument in their face, and rejects the long held conservative dogma that corporations can curb free speech, by recognizing that in the platforms they run, these companies operate beyond the boundaries envisioned by corporate entities of old, and behave like arbiters of expressions.

I expect to see a role reversal, with liberals furiously protecting corporations, and conservatives championing free speech. Bela Abzug rolling in her grave.

[lurk]

Add half a dozen other red states to this move by TX, and it might turn into something.