Get the latest tech news

The US Supreme Court Holds the Future of the Internet in Its Hands

If the court backs provocative laws from Texas and Florida that limit social platforms’ ability to moderate content online, life could become radically different.

The questions posed by the justices showed the court’s frustration at being “caught between two polar opposite positions, both of which have significant costs and benefits for freedom of speech,” says Cliff Davidson, a Portland-based attorney at Snell & Wilmer. David Greene, senior staff attorney and civil liberties director at the digital rights group Electronic Frontier Foundation, which filed a brief urging the court to strike down the laws, says there are clear public benefits to allowing social platforms to moderate content without government interference. Greene argues that the laws raise “significant First Amendment and human rights concerns” and are “profound intrusions into social media sites’ ability to decide for themselves what speech they will publish and how they will present it to users.”

Get the Android app