NetChoice, LLC, dba NetChoice, et al., Petitioners v. Ken Paxton, Attorney General of Texas

  1. June 01, 2024

    Blockbuster Summer: 10 Big Issues Justices Still Must Decide

    As the calendar flips over to June, the U.S. Supreme Court still has heaps of cases to decide on issues ranging from trademark registration rules to judicial deference and presidential immunity. Here, Law360 looks at 10 of the most important topics the court has yet to decide.

  2. February 26, 2024

    Clement, Prelogar Odd Bedfellows In Social Media Showdown

    After GOP-led states targeted perceived stifling of conservative voices on social media, Monday's oral arguments at the U.S. Supreme Court could have featured predictable partisan fissures. But the case instead illustrated that legal ideology in the digital age is sometimes surprising.

  3. February 26, 2024

    Justices Say Social Media Speech Laws Pose 'Land Mines'

    The U.S. Supreme Court seemed skeptical Monday of the constitutionality of Florida and Texas laws prohibiting social media platforms from removing content or users based on viewpoint, but struggled with whether the still-developing records in the lawsuits challenging the regulations could support a meaningful ruling on platforms' First Amendment rights.

  4. February 24, 2024

    Up Next At High Court: Social Media Laws & Bump Stocks

    The U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments related to three big-ticket cases this week in a pair of First Amendment challenges to Florida and Texas laws prohibiting social media platforms from removing content or users based on their viewpoints and a dispute over the federal government's authority to ban bump stocks.

  5. February 20, 2024

    Justices Give Feds Time In Texas, Fla. Social Media Law Fights

    The U.S. Supreme Court has set aside time for the federal government to weigh in on looming oral arguments in cases to determine the constitutionality of controversial Texas and Florida laws that restrict social media companies' ability to curb users' speech.

  6. January 23, 2024

    Justices Told Social Media Cos. Aren't Immune From All Laws

    Donald Trump, 20 states and various organizations have urged the U.S. Supreme Court to find that Texas' and Florida's laws prohibiting social media platforms from removing content or users based on viewpoints are constitutional, with some of them saying platforms can't disclaim liability for user content in one court term and then claim hosting it is protected speech the next.

  7. January 17, 2024

    States Say 1st Amendment Cases Favor Social Media Laws

    Florida and Texas have defended their controversial social media laws in reply briefs to the U.S. Supreme Court, saying First Amendment challenges brought by industry groups representing Facebook and Google are moot because their laws regulate the companies' conduct, not their speech.

  8. January 01, 2024

    5 Supreme Court Cases To Watch This Spring

    "Blockbuster," "momentous" and "historic" are all words that have been used to describe the U.S. Supreme Court's current term as the justices prepare for a spring docket jam-packed with questions over the level of deference courts should give federal agencies, whether and how social media companies should be regulated and whether government efforts to combat misinformation crosses the line between persuasion and coercion.

  9. December 14, 2023

    High Court Urged To Find Free Speech Nuance In Social Media

    A nonprofit public interest law firm is urging the U.S. Supreme Court to make clear in a pending decision about state social media laws that prohibit the banning of users or the removal of content that — whichever side prevails — the speech claims at issue in the appeals are weaker than claims by sincere religious speakers.

  10. December 08, 2023

    Solicitor General Urges Justices To Ax Social Media Laws

    U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth B. Prelogar has called on the U.S. Supreme Court to strike down laws in Texas and Florida that bar social media platforms from banning users or removing content, saying the content moderation provisions violate the First Amendment.