NetChoice, CCIA Challenge Fla. Social Network Law
Internet industry groups sued Florida over its social media law that makes it unlawful for sites to deplatform political candidates and requires sites be transparent about policing. NetChoice and the Computer and Communications Industry Association sued Thursday in U.S. District Court in Tallahassee. “The Act is so rife with fundamental infirmities that it appears to have been enacted without any regard for the Constitution,” they wrote. Our earlier news bulletin is here.
Stop Florida’s law before it takes effect July 1, NetChoice and CCIA urged the court. Florida's law "infringes on the rights to freedom of speech, equal protection, and due process protected by the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution," exceeds "Florida’s authority under the Constitution’s Commerce Clause and is preempted by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act," said the suit (case 4:21-cv-00220-RH-MAF).
Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) “anticipated legal challenges” and is “confident that this new legislation has a strong legal basis and protects Floridians’ constitutional rights,” a spokesperson emailed. “Big Tech is in some ways more powerful than government, and certainly less accountable. ... It is recognized that government has a role in protecting consumers against discrimination and deceptive/unfair trade practices, and this law is within that authority to rein in a powerful entity that oversteps individuals’ free speech rights.” Attorney General Ashley Moody (R) didn't comment but later tweeted. DeSantis lauded the law as he signed SB-7072 earlier this week (see 2105240045).
The state law infringes companies’ free speech “by compelling them to host -- and punishing them for taking virtually any action to remove or make less prominent -- even highly objectionable or illegal content, no matter how much that content may conflict with their terms or policies,” the challengers wrote. “These unprecedented restrictions are a blatant attack on a wide range of content-moderation choices that these private companies have to make on a daily basis to protect their services, users, advertisers, and the public at large from a variety of harmful, offensive, or unlawful material,” including pornography, terrorism incitement, conspiracy theories and COVID-19 vaccine disinformation.
NetChoice and CCIA questioned the law exempting theme park owners like Disney and Comcast’s Universal Studios. “This undisguised singling out of disfavored companies reflects the Act’s true purpose, which its sponsors freely admitted: to target and punish popular online services for their perceived views and for certain content-moderation decisions that state officials opposed.” Comcast declined to comment. Disney didn’t comment.
“We cannot stand idly by as Florida’s lawmakers push unconstitutional bills into law that bring us closer to state-run media and a state-run internet,” said NetChoice General Counsel Carl Szabo. CCIA is suing “to safeguard the industry’s free speech right to deliver on their commitments to users to mitigate harmful content online,” said President Matt Schruers.
A similar Texas bill passed the state Senate April 1 and awaits final vote in the House (see 2105140069). Time is running out, with Texas legislative session ending May 31.
Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., slammed such state efforts Monday. “Republican-led states are determined to pass laws to force websites and apps to host lies, misinformation and other slime, with full knowledge that those laws are unconstitutional.” The First Amendment and Communications Decency Act Section 230 make “clear that states have no power to compel private companies to host speech, especially from politicians.” Wyden’s office declined to comment on Thursday’s suit.
“These attempts to dictate platforms' political speech decisions are unwise and unconstitutional,” said Free Press Vice President-Policy Matt Wood, noting the group's suit last year against then President Donald Trump's executive order on Section 230. “Platforms have today and must retain their ability to curate content and customer bases, even though they so often fail to live up to their own policies against hosting and amplifying hateful and violent content.”