Last September, Texas Governor Greg Abbott signed a controversial ban on social media “censorship” into law, and now tech groups are fighting back.
The law currently only allows social networks to ban hate speech if it involves “specific threats of violence.” Challengers argue that the law effectively silences conservative voices.
Critics have now invoked the opinion of US Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas in a case involving Donald Trump and Twitter. The case stemmed from Trump being accused of violating the First Amendment by blocking people on Twitter. The Court ultimately ruled in his favor as he was no longer president.
Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act asserts that an “interactive computer service” cannot be treated as the publisher or speaker of third-party content, including social media platforms.
“In many ways, digital platforms that hold themselves out to the public resemble traditional common carriers. Though digital instead of physical, they are at bottom communications networks, and they ‘carry’ information from one user to another,” Thomas wrote. “A traditional telephone company laid physical wires to create a network connecting people. Digital platforms lay information infrastructure that can be controlled in much the same way.”
The law offers an extra layer of legal protection to websites from lawsuits if a user posts something illegal–it is also open to interpretation.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton agrees with Thomas and contends that Texas could govern social media platforms as common carriers.
“Even if the Hosting Rule implicated the platforms’ First Amendment rights in some way, the Attorney General is still likely to prevail because Texas law declares the platforms are common carriers,” Paxton argued. “The State may therefore properly limit the platforms’ ability to discriminate among their customers.”
During his time in office, Trump released an executive order targeting Section 230 and social media asking regulators to redefine Section 230. He accused Big Tech companies of possessing “unchecked power to censor, restrict, edit, shape, hide, alter” a considerable slice of human interchanges.
Trump is no longer in a position to write executive orders. However, some of his biggest supporters and allies continue to push forward his ideals.
However this plays out, much of cryptocurrency expansion and popularity is down to social media platforms. There has also been a hike in blockchain-based social networks.
Could these censorship laws have any significant lasting impact on the rise of cryptocurrency?
