Texas Beats Silicon Valley: Federal Court Upholds Law Banning Social Media Censorship

[PatMiles]

Texas Beats Silicon Valley: Federal Court Upholds Law Banning Social Media Censorship

A federal appeals court has upheld a Texas law allowing users to sue social media platforms in the event of wrongful account suspension, in a win for defenders of free speech online.

www.breitbart.com

A federal appeals court has upheld a Texas law allowing users to sue social media platforms in the event of wrongful account suspension, in a win for defenders of free speech online.


The decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit means the Texas bill, which was signed into law by Gov. Greg Abbott last year, is likely to end up before the Supreme Court, which will provide a final determination on whether social media companies have a right to censor their users.

For now, that “right” of censorship has been firmly rejected by the Fifth Circuit.


“Today we reject the idea that corporations have a freewheeling First Amendment right to censor what people say,” wrote U.S. Circuit Court Judge Andrew Oldham.


Representatives of the tech giants argue that forcing them to carry certain types of speech is itself a First Amendment violation. If this argument is valid, it means the First Amendment, oddly enough, provides corporations an unlimited right to censor.


This in turn makes it possible for the government the ability to censor citizens by proxy, demanding platforms suppress certain viewpoints, as the Biden Administration did at height of the coronavirus pandemic.

“The platforms are not newspapers. Their censorship is not speech,” wrote Oldham, rejecting the platforms’ argument that they have a First Amendment right to censor.

“The implications of the platforms’ argument are staggering. On the platforms’ view, email providers, mobile phone companies, and banks could cancel the accounts of anyone who sends an email, makes a phone call, or spends money in support of a disfavored political party, candidate, or business,” continued Oldham.

If the Texas law is upheld by the Supreme Court, it will give citizens of that state — and others, which are likely to follow suit — the right to sue social media companies for the restoration of their accounts. The Texas attorney general will also be empowered to sue social media companies on users’ behalf.

 

[SledDog]

Texas Beats Silicon Valley: Federal Court Upholds Law Banning Social Media Censorship

A federal appeals court has upheld a Texas law allowing users to sue social media platforms in the event of wrongful account suspension, in a win for defenders of free speech online.

www.breitbart.com

A federal appeals court has upheld a Texas law allowing users to sue social media platforms in the event of wrongful account suspension, in a win for defenders of free speech online.


The decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit means the Texas bill, which was signed into law by Gov. Greg Abbott last year, is likely to end up before the Supreme Court, which will provide a final determination on whether social media companies have a right to censor their users.

For now, that “right” of censorship has been firmly rejected by the Fifth Circuit.


“Today we reject the idea that corporations have a freewheeling First Amendment right to censor what people say,” wrote U.S. Circuit Court Judge Andrew Oldham.


Representatives of the tech giants argue that forcing them to carry certain types of speech is itself a First Amendment violation. If this argument is valid, it means the First Amendment, oddly enough, provides corporations an unlimited right to censor.


This in turn makes it possible for the government the ability to censor citizens by proxy, demanding platforms suppress certain viewpoints, as the Biden Administration did at height of the coronavirus pandemic.

“The platforms are not newspapers. Their censorship is not speech,” wrote Oldham, rejecting the platforms’ argument that they have a First Amendment right to censor.

“The implications of the platforms’ argument are staggering. On the platforms’ view, email providers, mobile phone companies, and banks could cancel the accounts of anyone who sends an email, makes a phone call, or spends money in support of a disfavored political party, candidate, or business,” continued Oldham.

If the Texas law is upheld by the Supreme Court, it will give citizens of that state — and others, which are likely to follow suit — the right to sue social media companies for the restoration of their accounts. The Texas attorney general will also be empowered to sue social media companies on users’ behalf.

Ridiculous ruling.

 

[W54/XM-388]

At this point any kicks in the crotch the evil Big Tech companies get are pretty satisfying to watch.

Big Tech has already been exposed as working hand in hand with the government as a quasi government agent in suppressing speech the ruling party does not like on orders from government officials, so they don't have much of a leg to stand on and whine about "private corporation" B.S.

 

[Arc Light]

Great ruling, hopefully it makes it to SCOTUS and it is upheld.

I know a lot of conservatives are still hung up on the "but they are a private company" bullshit. Conservatives are also masters of cutting off their noses to spite their face. Private companies lost that argument when they all went woke and PC and decided to take sides in the culture wars and openly discriminate against 50% of the country. Not like we can choose not to have a job, credit card, bank account, insurance, ship and receive lawful items, communicate with friends, workers, family, etc.

Woke corporations have denied these services and more to conservatives. So fuck them and their "private business" excuse. The government regulates the actions of private companies in a thousand ways every day. This is no different.

 

[thejeep]

Will the hammer still carry any weight?

 

[M4orturnate]

Theyre not private companies theyre public utilities. If thats the protection they get that how they have to operate

 

[madppcs]

So when is Army Jerry getting his account restored?





















heheheheh

 

[Trumpster24]

Texas Beats Silicon Valley: Federal Court Upholds Law Banning Social Media Censorship

A federal appeals court has upheld a Texas law allowing users to sue social media platforms in the event of wrongful account suspension, in a win for defenders of free speech online.

www.breitbart.com

A federal appeals court has upheld a Texas law allowing users to sue social media platforms in the event of wrongful account suspension, in a win for defenders of free speech online.


The decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit means the Texas bill, which was signed into law by Gov. Greg Abbott last year, is likely to end up before the Supreme Court, which will provide a final determination on whether social media companies have a right to censor their users.

For now, that “right” of censorship has been firmly rejected by the Fifth Circuit.


“Today we reject the idea that corporations have a freewheeling First Amendment right to censor what people say,” wrote U.S. Circuit Court Judge Andrew Oldham.


Representatives of the tech giants argue that forcing them to carry certain types of speech is itself a First Amendment violation. If this argument is valid, it means the First Amendment, oddly enough, provides corporations an unlimited right to censor.


This in turn makes it possible for the government the ability to censor citizens by proxy, demanding platforms suppress certain viewpoints, as the Biden Administration did at height of the coronavirus pandemic.

“The platforms are not newspapers. Their censorship is not speech,” wrote Oldham, rejecting the platforms’ argument that they have a First Amendment right to censor.

“The implications of the platforms’ argument are staggering. On the platforms’ view, email providers, mobile phone companies, and banks could cancel the accounts of anyone who sends an email, makes a phone call, or spends money in support of a disfavored political party, candidate, or business,” continued Oldham.

If the Texas law is upheld by the Supreme Court, it will give citizens of that state — and others, which are likely to follow suit — the right to sue social media companies for the restoration of their accounts. The Texas attorney general will also be empowered to sue social media companies on users’ behalf.

As you know, SCOTUS only hears about 80 out of 7,000 to 8,000 petitions or 1.06 %. The U.S. Constitution specifies certain kinds of cases the Supreme Court has the power to consider and rule on.
As of 10/10/23 and the The U.S. Supreme Court (the Court) recently issued decisions in two cases related to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (Section 230): Gonzalez v. Google and Twitter v. Taamneh. The question before the Court was whether interactive computer services and their systems are protected under Section 230. The decisions ultimately leave Section 230—and the existing operation of interactive computer services on systems that allow for third-party user content (social media; aka sociopathic)—UNCHANGED, as expected from our "just can't get anything done" congress but they also allow for potential future litigation. Yada, yada, yada, kicking the proverbial can down the road.