In Landmark Battle Over Free Speech, EFF Urges Supreme Court to Strike Down Texas and Florida Laws that Let States Dictate What Speech Social Media Sites Must Publish

<

div class=”field field–name-body field–type-text-with-summary field–label-hidden”>

<

div class=”field__items”>

<

div class=”field__item even”>

WASHINGTON D.C.—The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and five organizations defending free speech urged the Supreme Court to strike down laws in Florida and Texas that let the states dictate certain speech social media sites must carry, violating the sites’ First Amendment rights to curate content they publish—a protection that benefits users by creating speech forums catering to their diverse interests, viewpoints, and beliefs.

The court’s decisions about the constitutionality of the Florida and Texas laws—the first laws to inject government mandates into social media content moderation—will have a profound impact on the future of free speech. At stake is whether Americans’ speech on social media must adhere to government rules or be free of government interference.

Social media content moderation is highly problematic, and users are rightly often frustrated by the process and concerned about private censorship. But retaliatory laws allowing the government to interject itself into the process, in any form, raises serious First Amendment, and broader human rights, concerns, said EFF in a brief filed with the National Coalition Against Censorship, the Woodhull Freedom Foundation, Authors Alliance, Fight for The Future, and First Amendment Coalition.

“Users are far better off when publishers make editorial decisions free from government mandates,” said EFF Civil Liberties Director David Greene. “These laws would force social media sites to publish user

[…]
Content was cut in order to protect the source.Please visit the source for the rest of the article.