Set as Homepage - Add to Favorites

成人午夜福利A视频-成人午夜福利剧场-成人午夜福利免费-成人午夜福利免费视频-成人午夜福利片-成人午夜福利视

【apa hukum meliat video lucah di bulan puasa】Enter to watch online.Supreme Court questions if states can enforce social media censorship

The apa hukum meliat video lucah di bulan puasaSupreme Court is trying to decide how far the First Amendment reaches when it comes to social media.

On Monday, the nine justices heard a pair of cases that question if states can force social media platforms to abide by censorship rules — even when the platforms deem those posts hateful or otherwise objectionable. Here's what we know.

SEE ALSO: US Supreme Court warns of dangers of AI in legal profession

Which cases did the Supreme Court hear?

A relatively recent pair of laws in Texas and Florida were passed in the wake of the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. The laws argued that social media companies were censoring conservative users on their platforms and limited the avenues that social media companies can take concerning moderating content on the site. 


You May Also Like

"Freedom of speech is under attack in Texas," Texas Republican Gov. Greg Abbott said when he signed the bill into law in 2021. "There is a dangerous movement by some social media companies to silence conservative ideas and values. This is wrong and we will not allow it in Texas."

Two trade groups representing social media platforms have challenged the laws, from an appeals court up to the Supreme Court. Neither state is allowed to fully enforce the law yet, but it all depends on how the Supreme Court eventually rules. 

"There is nothing more Orwellian than the government trying to dictate what viewpoints are distributed in the name of free expression," Matt Schruers, the president of the Computer & Communications Industry Association, a trade group for social media companies, told NPR. "And that's what's at issue in this case."

Schruers said that these social media companies need to have "guidelines and terms of use to make sure that a community isn't polluted." Without being able to do their own content moderation, the industry argues, social media sites will be forced to publish more misinformation, disinformation, and hate speech, allowing more sinister activity can take place online. "And that's everything from posting dog pictures in the cat forum to barbeque in the vegan forum to far more serious things like trying to groom children in a children's site."

Mashable Light Speed Want more out-of-this world tech, space and science stories? Sign up for Mashable's weekly Light Speed newsletter. By clicking Sign Me Up, you confirm you are 16+ and agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Thanks for signing up!

Why is this so important?

Some legal experts argue that this is the most important First Amendment case in this generation. As Chief Justice John Roberts said during the hours-long arguments, "I wonder, since we're talking about the First Amendment, whether our first concern should be with the state regulating what, you know, we have called the modern public square?"

Basically, the judges are deciding whether the government should tell social media companies what they can or can not put on their platforms, or if social media companies are responsible for that alone. 

"Just as the government couldn’t force Benjamin Franklin to publish its preferred messages in his newspapers, Florida and Texas can’t force websites to curate, display, and spread their preferred content," Chris Marchese, Director of the NetChoice Litigation Center, said in a press release. "The First Amendment protects us and our speech from government encroachment — not the other way around. We are confident the Supreme Court will agree."

The state argues that social media platforms are actually currently censoring users — and that is a First Amendment violation on its own. 

"The platforms do not have a First Amendment right to apply their censorship policies in an inconsistent manner and to censor and deplatform certain users," Florida Solicitor General Henry Whitaker told the justices Monday, according to NPR.

The justices are going to help categorize social media, which is a lot more difficult than it sounds. Is Facebook basically like a phone company, where no one gets filtered or censored? Or is it a newspaper, where information is curated and edited and rely on the protection of the First Amendment? Or, as Justice Alito said, is it neither?

In short: This Supreme Court ruling could decide the fate of free speech on the internet as we know it.

Which social media platforms does this cover?

That's kind of confusing, and even the justices aren't sure. It seems like it definitely covers sites like Facebook, Instagram, Reddit, and X — but what about Uber or Venmo? We don't really know, but the Supreme Court will likely rule on the biggest social media platforms.

When will the Court give their answers?

The Supreme Court typically hands down their decision over the summer, before the last day of the Court's term. They could rule earlier, but don't hold your breath.

Topics Facebook Instagram Social Media X/Twitter Politics Meta

0.2641s , 9969.2734375 kb

Copyright © 2025 Powered by 【apa hukum meliat video lucah di bulan puasa】Enter to watch online.Supreme Court questions if states can enforce social media censorship,  

Sitemap

Top 主站蜘蛛池模板: 日韩欧美在线观看免费 | 老牛影视国产精品 | 成人国产在线看不卡 | 亚洲乱欲| 屁屁影院第二页 | 国产最新精品2025 | 成人看片在线观看免费 | 欧美性站 | 加勒比精品| 午夜在线成人 | 91久久人人 | 激情乱伦网站 | 日韩成人精品在线 | 91久操| 男女午夜爽爽爽 | 黄色毛片网站 | 亚洲国产福利 | 日韩特级| 国产精品2025 | 三级免费黄 | 日韩一级免费免费视频 | 中国人妖和人妖ⅩXX | 91丨熟女丨对白 | 无码午夜影院 | 欧美一级性 | 91丨熟女丨对白 | 精品欧美 | 区一区二视频 | 欧美精品免费播放 | 欧美成区 | 日韩亚洲欧美理论片 | 无码不卡免费 | 黑人性爱视频网站 | 日韩亚洲无 | heyzo.com| 亚洲卡一卡二在线 | 极品美女在线观看 | 久久这里只有是精品 | 日韩国产亚洲综合 | 日韩欧美亚洲国产一区 | 丁香五月丁香 |