Federal court upholds Texas social media law, clearing way for users to sue over censorship

[excalibur]

Good. So Texans can now sue.

Particularly since we know that Biden and his Rat Pack administration have been working with social media companies to censor people.

This is needed nationally.

A federal appeals court on Friday evening upheld Texas’ social media law, ruling that residents can sue big tech companies for censoring political viewpoints.

The 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a lower court ruling that had blocked the law from taking effect.

“Today we reject the idea that corporations have a freewheeling First Amendment right to censor what people say,” Judge Andrew S. Oldham wrote in the majority opinion.

The ruling clears the way for Texans and the Texas Attorney General's office to file lawsuits against Big Tech giants like YouTube, Twitter and Facebook if they take down or censor certain political viewpoints.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton tweeted out after the victory: “I just secured a MASSIVE VICTORY for the Constitution & Free Speech in fed court: #BigTech CANNOT censor the political voices of ANY Texan!”

...​

Federal court upholds Texas social media law, clearing way for users to sue over censorship

Texans now have the ability to sue big tech social media companies that censor certain political viewpoints

justthenews.com

 

[Penelope]

Chief Justice John Roberts, along with Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett granted the stay, which overturned the 5th Circuit ruling lifting an earlier injunction from a Texas district court. The district court has not yet ruled on the underlying merits and constitutionality of the case.

Supreme Court blocks Texas law on social media ‘censorship’

The ruling is a major victory for tech companies.

www.politico.com

Not according to the Supreme Court.

 

[Smokin' OP]

So, republicans, LOVE "free" market "capitalism" and no government inference from government.
Except, when corporations do something, they don't like.

Forcing PRIVATE companies to publish RWNJ propaganda or get sued.

 

[expat_panama]

Good. So Texans can now sue.

Particularly since we know that Biden and his Rat Pack administration have been working with social media companies to censor people.

This is needed nationally.

​

A federal appeals court on Friday evening upheld Texas’ social media law, ruling that residents can sue big tech companies for censoring political viewpoints.​

​

The 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a lower court ruling that had blocked the law from taking effect.​

​

“Today we reject the idea that corporations have a freewheeling First Amendment right to censor what people say,” Judge Andrew S. Oldham wrote in the majority opinion.​

​

The ruling clears the way for Texans and the Texas Attorney General's office to file lawsuits against Big Tech giants like YouTube, Twitter and Facebook if they take down or censor certain political viewpoints.​

​

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton tweeted out after the victory: “I just secured a MASSIVE VICTORY for the Constitution & Free Speech in fed court: #BigTech CANNOT censor the political voices of ANY Texan!”​

​

...​

Federal court upholds Texas social media law, clearing way for users to sue over censorship

Texans now have the ability to sue big tech social media companies that censor certain political viewpoints

justthenews.com

There's a former hangout for a number of us (but we can't mention its name here or the mods will censure us) which is a right wing outfit. For many years they've been pretty heavy handed so I'm wondering if a lot of those folks are going to raise a fuss...

 

[expat_panama]

There's a former hangout for a number of us (but we can't mention its name here or the mods will censure us) which is a right wing outfit. For many years they've been pretty heavy handed so I'm wondering if a lot of those folks are going to raise a fuss...

fyi Toddsterpatriot

 

[Penelope]

So out the 17 judges most of the judges are right wingers so is the supreme court.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (in case citations, 5th Cir.) is a federal court with appellate jurisdiction over the district courts in the following federal judicial districts:

• Eastern District of Louisiana
• Middle District of Louisiana
• Western District of Louisiana
• Northern District of Mississippi
• Southern District of Mississippi
• Eastern District of Texas
• Northern District of Texas
• Southern District of Texas
• Western District of Texas

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Cellblock2429]

So, republicans, LOVE "free" market "capitalism" and no government inference from government.
Except, when corporations do something, they don't like.

Forcing PRIVATE companies to publish RWNJ propaganda or get sued.

/——-/ Good job misrepresenting our position. When it comes to distorted posts, you're one of the best.

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

If Big Tech is donating to the Dems and then they are censoring criticism of the Dems and the Dems hold the House Senate and Presidency, >>> that is government censorship.

 

[1srelluc]

Thousands of over-zealous mods just screamed out in terror.

Meh, if social media implodes it would suit me just fine.

 

[PoliticalChic]

If Big Tech is donating to the Dems and then they are censoring criticism of the Dems and the Dems hold the House Senate and Presidency, >>> that is government censorship.

Anne Applebaum, who observes about Soviet-era suppression: “Actual censors were not always needed. Instead, a form of pervasive peer pressure convinced writers, journalists and everyone else’ to toe the party line; if they did not, they knew they risked being ejected from their jobs and shunned by their friends.”



JONATHAN TURLEY: I want to emphasize that a lot of people on the left that have said if it's not prohibited on the First Amendment, it's not a free speech issue. That's not true. The First Amendment is not the exclusive domain of free speech. What they are doing is shutting down free speech. The left has come on to a winning strategy. …. they've discovered that if they use corporations to control speech, it falls outside the First Amendment. But it's not true that what they're doing is not a free speech attack. It is. They're trying to stop people from speaking on these platforms….

Jonathan Turley: The left's success at silencing free speech would make Joe McCarthy blush​

Constitutional law expert Jonathan Turley on the left's attempt to cancel Joe Rogan and have him removed from Spotify.

www.foxnews.com

 

[Smokin' OP]

/——-/ Good job misrepresenting our position. When it comes to distorted posts, you're one of the best.

Really?

Then straighten it out.
How does that work, exactly?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Good. So Texans can now sue.

Particularly since we know that Biden and his Rat Pack administration have been working with social media companies to censor people.

This is needed nationally.

​

A federal appeals court on Friday evening upheld Texas’ social media law, ruling that residents can sue big tech companies for censoring political viewpoints.​

​

The 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a lower court ruling that had blocked the law from taking effect.​

​

“Today we reject the idea that corporations have a freewheeling First Amendment right to censor what people say,” Judge Andrew S. Oldham wrote in the majority opinion.​

​

The ruling clears the way for Texans and the Texas Attorney General's office to file lawsuits against Big Tech giants like YouTube, Twitter and Facebook if they take down or censor certain political viewpoints.​

​

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton tweeted out after the victory: “I just secured a MASSIVE VICTORY for the Constitution & Free Speech in fed court: #BigTech CANNOT censor the political voices of ANY Texan!”​

​

...​

Federal court upholds Texas social media law, clearing way for users to sue over censorship

Texans now have the ability to sue big tech social media companies that censor certain political viewpoints

justthenews.com

Sweet, I am going to sue this place!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

fyi Toddsterpatriot

Ha!

 

[iceberg]

There's a former hangout for a number of us (but we can't mention its name here or the mods will censure us) which is a right wing outfit. For many years they've been pretty heavy handed so I'm wondering if a lot of those folks are going to raise a fuss...

sites like this simply don't carry the same weight. those trying to argue facebook is merely a forum on 'roids are lying to themselves.

 

[iceberg]

Sweet, I am going to sue this place!

good luck with that. despite your best hardheaded arguments, it is simply not the same thing.

from the judge:

“The implications of the platforms’ argument are staggering. On the platforms’ view, email providers, mobile phone companies, and banks could cancel the accounts of anyone who sends an email, makes a phone call, or spends money in support of a disfavored political party, candidate, or business. What’s worse, the platforms argue that a business can acquire a dominant market position by holding itself out as open to everyone – as Twitter did in championing itself as “the free speech wing of the free speech party.” Then, having cemented itself as the monopolist of “the modern public square”, Twitter unapologetically argues that it could turn and ban all pro-LGBT speech for no other reason than its employees want to pick on members of that community.”
-----
couple that with facebook monitoring your private messaging and turning you into the FBI if you dare question them, it simply IS NOT THE SAME.

but keep thinking it is. have fun, n shit.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

good luck with that. despite your best hardheaded arguments, it is simply not the same thing.

from the judge:

“The implications of the platforms’ argument are staggering. On the platforms’ view, email providers, mobile phone companies, and banks could cancel the accounts of anyone who sends an email, makes a phone call, or spends money in support of a disfavored political party, candidate, or business. What’s worse, the platforms argue that a business can acquire a dominant market position by holding itself out as open to everyone – as Twitter did in championing itself as “the free speech wing of the free speech party.” Then, having cemented itself as the monopolist of “the modern public square”, Twitter unapologetically argues that it could turn and ban all pro-LGBT speech for no other reason than its employees want to pick on members of that community.”
-----
couple that with facebook monitoring your private messaging and turning you into the FBI if you dare question them, it simply IS NOT THE SAME.

but keep thinking it is. have fun, n shit.

And none of that would stop me from suing the shit out of this place under the Texas ruling.

 

[iceberg]

And none of that would stop me from suing the shit out of this place under the Texas ruling.

go ahead. you do a lot of stupid shit and this would simply add to the list. to pretend this has the same impact as facebook is asanine.

but when you get headstrong, that's what you do.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

go ahead. you do a lot of stupid shit and this would simply add to the list. to pretend this has the same impact as facebook is asanine.

but when you get headstrong, that's what you do.

I never said it had the same impact as FB, but that is irrelevant. Unless you are arguing for unequal application of the law

 

[iceberg]

I never said it had the same impact as FB, but that is irrelevant. Unless you are arguing for unequal application of the law

No it is not but I'm not repeating arguments with you.

DOJ has shown that when you become anti competitive you face problems.

But you do you.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

No it is not but I'm not repeating arguments with you.

DOJ has shown that when you become anti competitive you face problems.

But you do you.

Every company is anti competitive.

Do you think that Coke is out there helping Pepsi do better?