A federal appeals court last week allowed the Texas law to take effect immediately, even before judges finish weighing the merits of the statute.
“We cannot as a society allow for social media platforms — or broadcast or cable news — to be used as tools to further tribalism, diminishing democracy,” he said. “That is what happened leading up to World War II and Nazi Germany. We have too many lessons in the past we can look to to determine it is not healthy for communities, it is not safe it is not safe for individuals.
Under the law, social media platforms with 50 million or more active monthly users could face fines of $25,000 for each day they impede certain viewpoints protected by the law. Before passing HB 20, Texas lawmakers voted down a Democratic amendment that would have allowed removal of material that “directly or indirectly promotes or supports” international or domestic terrorism, which could have applied to the Buffalo manifesto and livestream.state Rep. Jon Rosenthal, who introduced the amendment, said Wednesday that the Buffalo shooting shows the need for such a provision, while faulting Republicans for blocking the measure.
Social media companies have spent years adjusting their approaches to hate speech and violence after past violent mass shootings, including a pair of attacks at two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand, that left 51 people dead in 2019. The gunman in both attacks — who identified with white supremacist ideologies — livestreamed one shooting on Facebook and posted his manifesto online.
Davidlaz The Supreme Court needs term limits with an infinite appointment there’s no democracy.
Maybe if America wasn't a nation of 40year old immature, entitled, spoiled brat adolescents it wouldn't be necessary. But too many people, particularly on the right, would rather be assholes than adults.
Why don’t they just become their own Country
This happened over 6 days ago but far less national media attention.
When did social media companies take down the Buffalo shooter's manifesto? I've looked for it, but every search comes back with reports on what it says, not the actual document.
Davidlaz WHAT? This is CRAZY!
While there is an argument to be had about the virtual public square, I worry we are headed for a socially destructive loss of freedom of association. Freedom of association matters. What if companies weren't allowed to fire socially toxic people who drove good employees away?
Of course the gop wants to censor books and movies but keep the violence.
We have a White Nationalist Supreme Court!
Arrepemdam recebam Jesus sejam santo o tempo acabou o Messias está vindo.
Tech companies can just have ther apps not work in texas. No service no issues.
This argument is so asinine! The interpretation of the Constitution & Amendments w/this stacked 🤡 Supreme Court is 🗑... Companies need to preview ALL content before publication, just like TV & radio to adhere to FCC rules or else fines. Speech = Communication, FCC REGULATE!
Good...they should not remove it. Let people decide for themselves what they want to read or see...
I can access it right now via the internet. Your article is jaded.
Sting “never saw a miracle of science that didn’t go from a blessing to a curse.” Putz. Kinda right though.
OK why is that a bad thing? Unless you think adults are like toddlers and cant understand the world... oh right politico, leftist, gotchya, can't have people read things that aren't leftist it might make them not be leftist anymore...