Supreme Court hears arguments on the future of online speech: all the news
See all Stories
A
Justices keep pointing out that lots of online moderation involves editorial judgment calls, and there’s a huge variety of sites online.
Clarence Thomas complains that there’s a lack of specificity in the discussion about what’s covered, and Samuel Alito pushes on whether the law could regulate “expressive” conduct that should deserve First Amendment protection.
Overall, justices are (understandably) focusing a lot whether these companies are really presenting themselves as “open for business” to all comers, or whether they’re making newspaper-like judgments — Kagan asks why banning these editorial-style judgments is not, as she puts it, a “classic First Amendment violation.”
Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.
Loading comments
Getting the conversation ready...
