Supreme Court blocks Texas social-media law that Tech companies warned would permit hateful information to run rampant in Texas.

Texas attorney general Ken Paxton (a Republican) has stated that this is not true.

He wrote in a reply to the emergency application, that the law doesn’t “prohibit platforms from removing whole categories of content.”

“So, for instance,” the reply says, “The platforms can decide to remove pornography without violating H.B 20…” They can ban foreign speech from any government without violating the HB 20 so that they don’t have to host Russia-related propaganda about Ukraine.

Justice Samuel Alito voted against the lifting of the stay in the 5-4 vote. He issued a written explanation explaining his vote. Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, and two other conservative justices joined him. Justice Elena Kagan (liberal) also voted against the stay.

 Alito’s dissent began by acknowledging the importance of the case to social media companies as well as states that regulate how these companies control the content posted on their platforms.

Alito wrote that the application “regards issues of great significance that will clearly merit this Court’s review.” 

“Social media platforms are changing the way people communicate and get news. A Texas law is at issue that addresses the power of social media corporations to influence public discussion on the most pressing issues of the day.

Alito stated that he would have permitted the law to continue in force as the case progresses through federal courts. Alito stressed that he had not yet formed a final view on the new legal issues that Texas’s decision to address “changing socio-economic” conditions has raised.

He wrote, “But precisely because that, I’m not comfortable intervening in this point of the proceedings.” “While I understand the Court’s desire to delay enforcement of HB20 while the appeal is pending but the District Court’s preliminary injunction was itself a significant intrusion into state sovereignty and Texas shouldn’t be required to seek preclearance before its laws become effective,