NetChoice Attorney Paul Clement and U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar both made stunning admissions during oral arguments for landmark free speech cases.
On Feb. 26, the U.S. Supreme Court heard two landmark cases — Moody v. NetChoice and NetChoice v. Paxton — challenging Texas and Florida’s state laws protecting free speech. The new laws would limit Big Tech’s ability to censor users based on viewpoint discrimination, as a publisher might. However, the protections provided by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act would continue to apply. But Big Tech wants to have its cake and eat it too. While arguing on behalf of big tech, Solicitor General Prelogar made the admission that social media companies are “literally, factually publishers.” This admission was echoed by Clement who told Justice Clarence Thomas that “Congress wanted us…
