Court lets Texas restrictions on social platform content moderation take effect

Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images

The US appeals court ruled that the Texas social media law will take effect. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals granted Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton's request for a stay on the case after NetChoice and the Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA) succeeded in blocking the bill in court. NetChoice and the CCIA were successful in blocking a similar law in Florida.

Texas residents can be sued by the office of the governor if they want to take legal action against social networks that moderate based on the viewpoint of the user or another person.

The Fifth Circuit judge claimed that web services like Twitter are not websites and compared them to phone companies that are governed by the FCC. NetChoice and the CCIA have the option to mount an emergency appeal, but without the Supreme Court's intervention, the law is in force.

In an unusual and unfortunate move, a split Fifth Circuit panel lifted the injunction without ruling on the merits and without issuing an opinion explaining the order. Carl Szabo, vice president and general counsel of NetChoice, said that they plan to appeal the order because it is constitutionally rotten.

There are web services that have more than 50 million active monthly users and rely on user-generated content. Many smaller sites and apps are included. The rules apply to email providers. The decision to let state governments control how companies moderate websites is unprecedented. It also conflicts with a different circuit's decision to block the law in Florida, which could lead to a Supreme Court fight over moderation.

It is not clear what the decision will mean for Texas residents or others on the internet. The rule applies to decisions made after the law takes effect. There were questions about whether or not it would change its policies. Meta, the owner of Facebook, declined to comment.

The decision hinges on judges' sympathy for claims that large social networks constitute a public square or a utility akin to a phone network. Under the Obama administration, internet service providers like Comcast were considered common carriers, but those rules were quickly repealed by President Donald Trump.

Texas's law violates the First Amendment because it requires social media companies to publish speech they don't want to publish. The Knight First Amendment Institute's senior staff attorney said in a statement after the decision that the theory of the First Amendment would give government broad power to censor and distort public discourse.

The Knight Institute said in a brief that the law could prevent sites from enforcing their policies because of the amount of user content that expresses a viewpoint. The Knight Institute suggests adding fact-checking notes or any other labels to the rules that apply to banning users or removing content.

Even if it is repealed, it could send a domino effect across the internet.