Illustration: Aïda Amer/Axios
The Supreme Court on Monday sent cases about the government's power to control how social media companies moderate content back to lower courts to further review.
Why it matters: The Supreme Court's decision to punt the issue of tech platforms' legal liability back to the lower courts means both sides get more time to argue their cases but the issue is not yet fully resolved.
Driving the news: The court remanded to lower courts both NetChoice v. Moody and NetChoice v. Paxton, cases originating in Florida and Texas, challenging laws that restrict tech companies' ability to moderate or remove posts with political content.
- In another case last week, Murthy v. Missouri, the Supreme Court upheld the government's ability to discuss the removal of content with platforms, saying the plaintiffs lacked standing to sue.
What they're saying: The court wrote without any dissenting opinions that both lower courts, the 5th and 11th circuits, applied the wrong test in deciding whether the laws violate the First Amendment.
- The opinion hinted its disapproval of the laws: "A State may not interfere with private actors' speech to advance its own vision of ideological balance," the opinion reads, with Justice Elena Kagan writing that content moderation by social media platforms is protected by the First Amendment.
- In Murthy v. Missouri, Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote that the Fifth Circuit was wrong in its preceding decision and plaintiffs did not prove any substantial risk of an jury from a government defendant.
Catch up quick: The Florida and Texas laws were passed after former President Trump's Facebook and Twitter accounts were suspended.
- Republican lawmakers argue that those and other examples, including the removal of 2020 election disinformation, as examples of tech companies censoring conservative speech.
- One appeals court had previously struck down the Florida law while a separate appeals court had upheld the Texas one.
State of play: Neither law is currently in effect, awaiting courts' resolution of the challenges.
What they're saying: "Today's ruling from the Supreme Court is a victory for First Amendment rights online," said Chris Marchese, Director of the NetChoice Litigation Center. "As our cases head back to the lower courts for consideration, the Supreme Court agreed with all our First Amendment arguments."
Our thought bubble: This is mostly a win for the social media platforms, but it's going to continue to drag out any certainty on the outcome until the courts finally conclude their process — or in the unlikely event that Congress passes new laws governing social media content moderation.
