{"id":15033,"date":"2024-07-18T12:43:47","date_gmt":"2024-07-18T16:43:47","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsmediaalliance.org\/?p=15033"},"modified":"2025-01-30T17:57:37","modified_gmt":"2025-01-30T22:57:37","slug":"moody-v-netchoice-llc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsmediaalliance.org\/moody-v-netchoice-llc\/","title":{"rendered":"Moody v. NetChoice, LLC"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong>Decided:<\/strong> July 1, 2024<br \/>\n<strong>Citation:<\/strong> <em>Moody v. NetChoice, LLC and NetChoice, LLC v. Paxton, 603 U.S. ___ (2024)<\/em><br \/>\n<strong>Appeal from:<\/strong> Eleventh Circuit; Fifth Circuit<br \/>\n<strong>Case document:<\/strong> <em><a href=\"https:\/\/www.supremecourt.gov\/opinions\/23pdf\/22-277_d18f.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Moody v. NetChoice, LLC<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Facts of the case<\/strong><br \/>\nIn 2021, both Florida and Texas passed laws seeking to regulate the ability of large internet platforms (such as Facebook and X) to moderate their user\u2019s content on the platforms. NetChoice, an internet trade association, filed lawsuits challenging both laws in Florida and Texas, arguing that they violated the First Amendment. The district courts in both states agreed with NetChoice and issued preliminary injunctions to prevent the laws from taking effect. Florida and Texas appealed, and the Eleventh Circuit upheld the injunction, while the Fifth Circuit reversed the injunction. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Question for the Court<\/strong><br \/>\nThe Court considered whether the Florida and Texas state laws regulating large internet platforms violated the First Amendment.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Decision<\/strong><br \/>\nIn a 9-0 <a href=\"https:\/\/www.supremecourt.gov\/opinions\/23pdf\/22-277_d18f.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">decision<\/span><\/a> by Justice Kagan on July 1, 2024, the judgments of the Eleventh and Fifth Circuit are vacated and remanded, the Court finding that neither of the Circuit Courts conducted a proper analysis of the facial First Amendment challenges to the state laws. Further, Kagan\u2019s opinion (joined in full by Justices Robert, Sotomayor, Kavanaugh and Barrett) stated that the platforms\u2019 \u201cchoices about which messages are appropriate give the feed a particular expressive quality and \u2018constitute the exercise\u2019 of protected \u2018editorial control\u2019\u2019. In a concurrence, Justice Jackson suggested the Court should show restraint in deciding these questions.<\/p>\n<p>Justice Alito\u2019s concurrence (joined by Justices Thomas and Gorsuch) showed skepticism that NetChoice had met its burden in proving that the laws are facially invalid. Alito made a distinction between \u201c[n]ewspaper editors [that] are real human beings\u201d compared to the \u201cplatforms, by contrast, [that] play no role in selecting the billions of texts and videos that users try to convey to each other.\u201d He went on to state that \u201calgorithms remove a small fraction of nonconforming posts post hoc and prioritize content based on factors that the platforms have not revealed and may not even know.\u201d<\/p>\n<p><strong>Free press implications<\/strong><br \/>\nIt remains to be seen what impact this decision has on the free press, given both cases must be relitigated in the lower courts. The opinion provides support for protecting the editorial discretion freedoms expressed in <a href=\"https:\/\/supreme.justia.com\/cases\/federal\/us\/418\/241\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Miami <em>Herald Pub. Co. v. Tornillo<\/em><\/a>, but also a divergence in opinion among the justices when comparing a traditional newspaper\u2019s exercise of editorial discretion compared to the various ways a large internet platform moderates content. In Justice Barrett\u2019s concurrence, she notes that an as applied challenge would enable a court to determine \u201cwhether and how specific functions\u2014like feeds versus direct messaging\u2014are inherently expressive\u201d. In the meantime, both states\u2019 laws will remain blocked.<\/p>\n<p><strong>For further reading, please visit:<\/strong><br \/>\n<em><a href=\"https:\/\/supreme.justia.com\/cases\/federal\/us\/418\/241\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">SCOTUS blog: NetChoice v. Paxton<\/a><\/em><br \/>\n<em><a href=\"https:\/\/www.scotusblog.com\/case-files\/cases\/netchoice-llc-v-moody\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">SCOTUS blog: NetChoice v. Moody<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The Court considered whether the Florida and Texas state laws regulating large internet platforms violated the First Amendment. In a 9-0 decision the judgments of the Eleventh and Fifth Circuit are vacated and remanded. Decided on July 1, 2024.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":6,"featured_media":13989,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"site-sidebar-layout":"default","site-content-layout":"","ast-site-content-layout":"default","site-content-style":"default","site-sidebar-style":"default","ast-global-header-display":"","ast-banner-title-visibility":"","ast-main-header-display":"","ast-hfb-above-header-display":"","ast-hfb-below-header-display":"","ast-hfb-mobile-header-display":"","site-post-title":"","ast-breadcrumbs-content":"","ast-featured-img":"","footer-sml-layout":"","theme-transparent-header-meta":"default","adv-header-id-meta":"","stick-header-meta":"","header-above-stick-meta":"","header-main-stick-meta":"","header-below-stick-meta":"","astra-migrate-meta-layouts":"set","ast-page-background-enabled":"default","ast-page-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"ast-content-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"wds_primary_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[9,1538],"tags":[716],"class_list":["post-15033","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-advocacy","category-supreme-court-1a","tag-tag-two"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsmediaalliance.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15033","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsmediaalliance.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsmediaalliance.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsmediaalliance.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/6"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsmediaalliance.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=15033"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsmediaalliance.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15033\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsmediaalliance.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/13989"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsmediaalliance.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=15033"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsmediaalliance.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=15033"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsmediaalliance.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=15033"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}