US Supreme Court Blocks Texas Law Banning Social Media Companies From Censoring User-generated Content

JAKARTA - The US Supreme Court on Tuesday, May 31 blocked a Texas law that barred major social media companies from censoring users based on "point of view." They are said to be siding with two tech industry groups who argue that the Republican-backed move will turn social media platforms into a "paradise on earth" for the meanest expression imaginable.

The judge, in a 5-4 ruling, granted a request by NetChoice and the Computer & Communications Industry Association, which has Facebook, Twitter and YouTube as members, to block the Act, while litigation continued after a lower court on May 11 allowed it to take effect.

Industry groups are suing to try to block the law, challenging it as a violation of the company's free speech rights, including editorial discretion on their platforms, under the First Amendment to the US Constitution.

Conservative Judges Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch issued written dissent. They said that "it is not at all clear how our existing precedent, which predates the internet age, should apply to the big social media companies." Liberal Judge Elena Kagan separately disagreed but did not give any reasons.

Texas laws are passed by the Republican-led state legislature and signed by its Republican governor. His complaints came as US conservatives and far-right commentators complained that "Big Tech" was suppressing their views.

These individuals cite as a prominent example the permanent suspension of former Republican President Donald Trump's accounts from social media platforms shortly after January 6, 2021, the attack on the US Capitol by his mob of supporters. Social media companies cited the "risk of further incitement to violence."

The Texas law, officially known as HB20, prohibits social media companies with at least 50 million monthly active users from acting to "censor" users based on "point of view," and allows users or the Texas attorney general to sue to enforce it.

In signing the bill last September, Texas Governor Greg Abbott said, "There is a dangerous move by some social media companies to silence conservative ideas and values. This is wrong and we will not allow it in Texas."

Industry groups say the state's laws would unconstitutionally allow government control over private speech. Limiting the platform's editorial control, the group said, "would force the platform to spread all sorts of objectionable viewpoints — such as Russian propaganda claiming that its invasion of Ukraine was justified."

"Instead of a platform that engages in editorial discretion, the platform will be a haven of the most vicious expressions imaginable: pro-Nazi speeches, hostile foreign government propaganda, pro-terrorist organization speeches, and many other examples," they added, as quoted by Reuters.

The groups also denounced what they called "point-of-view discrimination against 'Big Tech,'" in Texas law through the exclusion of smaller social media platforms popular with conservatives such as Parler, Gab, Gettr, and the proprietary of Tump's Truth Social.

US Judge Robert Pitman in the state capital Austin blocked the legislation last December. Pitman ruled that restrictions on how platforms disseminate content violated the First Amendment.

The New Orleans-based 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals later delayed Pitman's decision two days after hearing oral arguments in the case. The 5th Circuit has yet to issue a verdict on the merits of the case.