After an appeals court struck down key parts of a state law designed to prevent social media companies from freely making content moderation decisions, Florida wants the Supreme Court to intervene.
Ashley moody, Florida's attorney general, filed a petition asking the nation's Supreme Court to take up the matter after two federal appeals courts issued contradictory rulings.
In Florida, the US Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit ruled that it was unconstitutional for the state to prevent social media companies from issuing bans to political figures. While the Court has struck down most of the Florida law, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld a parallel law in Texas known as House Bill 20, ruling that it does not violate the First Amendment rights of social networking sites. .
In Florida, Senate Bill 7072 prohibits platforms to ban or deprioritize candidates for statewide office, as well as to media above a certain size threshold. The law would expose social media companies to lawsuits when users or the state determine they moderated content or user accounts in a way that violated the spirit of the law.
Unlike in Texas, the court that reviewed the Florida law found that social media companies were bound by the First Amendment when it comes to making decisions about content moderation.
“We conclude that the content moderation activities of social media platforms (allow, delete, prioritize and deprioritize users and posts) constitute 'speech' within the meaning of the First Amendment.", wrote the panel of judges in the court ruling.
