Conservatives Ask High Court to Consider Common Carriage Arguments
The Supreme Court should review a lawsuit against Florida’s social media content moderation law to determine whether platforms can be regulated as common carriers, the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence (CCJ) said Monday in a brief supporting Florida in docket 21-12355…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
(see 2210110030). Florida asked the high court to reverse an 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision that a state law’s social moderation limits are likely unconstitutional. NetChoice and the Computer and Communications Industry Association are challenging Florida’s law as a First Amendment violation. CCJ, which files briefs on behalf of the conservative Claremont Institute, cited Justice Clarence Thomas’ suggestion that the high court should consider “its line of cases upholding regulation of ‘common carriers’ in reviewing regulation of social media platforms.” CCJ noted the concept of common carrier has evolved to include the use of roads, telephones and the telegraph. Social media platforms don’t transport goods, but they transmit communication like a phone or telegraph, said CCJ. If platforms are determined to be common carriers, content neutral, must-carry regulations like those in Florida wouldn’t violate the First Amendment so long as they “further an important interest unrelated to the suppression of speech,” CCJ said. The court should review how social media regulation fits into existing First Amendment precedent, said CCJ.