Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
On appeal, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals found that there had been some coercion in the government's contact with social media companies in violation of the First Amendment, but narrowed the extent of Doughty's injunction to block any attempts by the government to threaten or coerce moderation on social media. The U.S. Supreme Court ...
Supreme Court justices slammed First Amendment arguments made by TikTok as the popular social media app tries to avoid a U.S. ban in the coming days.. Lawyers for ByteDance, the parent company of ...
The Supreme Court on Monday appeared deeply skeptical of arguments by two conservative states that the First Amendment bars the government from pressuring social media platforms to remove online ...
The Supreme Court will hear another social media censorship case in 2024, this one originally filed by Louisiana's Attorney General Jeff Landry and Missouri’s Attorney General (now Senator) Eric ...
ACLU, the United States Supreme Court found the anti-indecency provisions of the Act unconstitutional. [22] Writing for the Court, Justice John Paul Stevens held that "the CDA places an unacceptably heavy burden on protected speech". [23] Section 230 [24] is a separate portion of the CDA that remains in effect.
Moody v. NetChoice, LLC and NetChoice, LLC v.Paxton, 603 U.S. 707 (2024), were United States Supreme Court cases related to protected speech under the First Amendment and content moderation by interactive service providers on the Internet under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.
The Supreme Court may find that when social media platforms restrict, fact-check, take down or leave up content, this is constitutionally protected speech and the government cannot interfere ...
The Supreme Court cast doubt Monday on state laws that could affect how Facebook, TikTok, X, YouTube and other social media platforms regulate content posted by their users. The cases are among ...