Wikipedia talk:Meetup/DC/Supreme Court visit for NetChoice vs Paxton

Latest comment: 4 months ago by PetraMagna in topic Outdated link

Notes on the laws edit

These are interpretive statements by me as I puzzle out the issue. Quotes are generally from the WMF's amicus brief.

  • The cases are about two (similar?) laws: Texas House Bill 20 and Florida Senate Bill 7072
  • The Florida law in question is cited as S.B. 7072. "S.B. 7072 prohibits a “social media platform” from “tak[ing] any action to censor, deplatform, or shadow ban a journalistic enterprise based on the content of its publication or broadcast.” " The law was intended to protect conservative/right-leaning journalistic work from being blocked/cut on social media. The law is not in effect; it has been enjoined by a court, roughly because it was thought to violate the First Amendment. "In enjoining Florida’s law, the Eleventh Circuit explained that “a private entity’s decisions about whether, to what extent, and in what manner to disseminate third-party-created content to the public are editorial judgments protected by the First Amendment.” "
  • From WMF news release: "These laws have prompted NetChoice, a trade organization representing many of the largest multinational technology firms, as well as the Computer and Communications Industry Association, to sue the attorneys general of Texas and Florida (Paxton and Moody, respectively), citing violations of the First Amendment and other elements of the US Constitution."
  • The WMF brief says: The [Florida] statute defines a “journalistic enterprise” as, inter alia, “an entity doing business in Florida that [p]ublishes in excess of 100,000 words available online with at least 50,000 paid subscribers or 100,000 monthly active users.” . . . It is unclear whether the Wikimedia Projects would fall into this definition based on the user-generated Wikipedia articles that are “published” online. [The] Foundation could possibly be considered both a social media platform and a journalistic enterprise under the law [] adds to the confusion."

-- econterms (talk) 07:02, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Outdated link edit

The link http://home.gwu.edu/~zwolfe/site/SCOTUS_tips.html is no longer accessible. It's still available on Wayback Machine, but perhaps a more up-to-date article should be used? PetraMagna (talk) 10:06, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply