Moody v. NetChoice
Overview
Overview
Florida and Texas passed laws preventing large social media platforms from removing or restricting content based on the viewpoint expressed. A direct response to perceived conservative censorship by tech companies. The platforms sued, arguing the laws violated their own First Amendment right to make editorial choices about what content to host. The Supreme Court ruled unanimously in July 2024 that the lower courts hadn't properly analyzed the First Amendment questions, and sent the cases back without resolving whether the laws were constitutional. The underlying question. Whether a social media platform's content moderation is protected editorial speech, and whether states can require platforms to carry content they'd otherwise remove. Remains open and will produce another SCOTUS case when the lower courts work through it.
The Conclusion
Conclusion
The Supreme Court unanimously found the lower courts failed to properly analyze First Amendment issues and remanded the cases. The core questions. Whether platform content moderation is protected editorial speech and whether states can require platforms to carry content. Remain unresolved.
Flag an issue
This tracker is maintained by BrynoDC and is free because readers fund it. Support