Supreme Court To Decide Case Restricting Content On Platforms

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday agreed to decide the legality of Republican-backed state laws in Texas and Florida that constrain the ability of social media companies to curb content on their platforms that these businesses deem objectionable.

Reuters reports the justices took up two cases involving challenges by technology industry groups who argued that these 2021 laws restricting the content-moderation practices of large social media platforms violate the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment protections for freedom of speech. Lower courts split on the issue, striking down key provisions of Florida's law while upholding the Texas measure.

The industry challengers to the laws are NetChoice and the Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA), industry groups whose members include Facebook parent Meta Platforms Inc (META.O), Alphabet Inc's Google, which owns YouTube, as well as TikTok and X, formerly called Twitter.

CCIA President Matt Schruers called the court's decision to tackle the case encouraging. "It is high time that the Supreme Court resolves whether governments can force websites to publish dangerous content. Telling private websites they must give equal treatment to extremist hate isn't just unwise, it is unconstitutional, and we look forward to demonstrating that to the court," Schruers said.

Supporters of the laws have argued that social media platforms have engaged in impermissible censorship and have silenced conservative voices in particular. Advocates of content moderation have argued for the need to stop misinformation and the amplification of extremist causes.

President Joe Biden's administration had told the justices in a court filing that the cases merited review because the state laws burdened the rights of the companies.

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday has also agreed to clarify the time period for which plaintiffs can recover damages over copyright claims in a case involving a Miami music producer who sued Warner Music's Atlantic Records label after hip-hop artist Flo Rida made use of a 1980s song that he claims he owns. The justices took up an appeal by two music publishing companies - Warner Music's Warner Chappell as well as Artist Publishing Group - of a lower court's ruling that defendants in copyright infringement cases can be held liable for actions that occurred prior to the three-year statute of limitations for filing such litigation, according to Reuters.