In our next Conversation, Floyd Abrams will discuss with Yale Law Professor Jack Balkin just what is at stake in the pair of cases now before the Supreme Court concerning the power of states to regulate content moderation on social media platforms: Moody v. NetChoice and NetChoice v. Paxton. The cases arise from laws enacted by Florida and Texas to limit the power of the largest social media companies to curate the speech disseminated over their platforms and to compel them to disclose a variety of information to the public. These cases raise fundamental First Amendment questions—the platforms object that any regulation implicating their content-moderation decisions is unconstitutional, while Florida and Texas argue that content-moderation decisions do not implicate the First Amendment at all. They are also politically charged. Proponents defend the laws as necessary to rein in powerful social media websites that are not elevating conservative voices. Opponents fear a decision upholding the laws would give governments sweeping and unprecedented powers to control what voters read, increase the risk of political violence, and subvert elections.
Taking place just days after the Court hears arguments in these cases, this Conversation will explore the key constitutional arguments being advanced, their implications for the future of the Internet, and the reception they received at the Supreme Court. You won’t want to miss this insightful discussion with one of our nation’s deepest thinkers about the regulation of technology, protection of free expression, and preservation of competitive markets. Please join us.
