11th Circuit: Fla. May Not Restrict Social Platforms' Content Moderation

Government may not restrict content moderation by social media platforms, the 11th U.S. Court of Appeals ruled in a 3-0 opinion Monday on Florida’s law that makes it illegal for social media sites to deplatform political candidates and requires them to be transparent about policing. The court allowed most of the law’s disclosure rules.

The 11th Circuit maintained a lower court’s preliminary injunction on the Florida law’s content-moderation rules and one "particularly onerous" disclosure rule requiring platforms to give a thorough rationale for every moderation decision. The court lifted preliminary injunction on other "far less burdensome" disclosure provisions that the court found are unlikely to violate the First Amendment.

"We hold that it is substantially likely that social-media companies -- even the biggest ones -- are 'private actors' whose rights the First Amendment protects, ... that their so-called 'content-moderation' decisions constitute protected exercises of editorial judgment, and that the provisions of the new Florida law that restrict large platforms’ ability to engage in content moderation unconstitutionally burden that prerogative,” wrote Judge Kevin Newsom with judges Gerald Tjoflat and Ed Carnes.

The ruling is “good news for internet users, the First Amendment and free speech in a democracy,” said Matt Schruers, president of plaintiff Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA).

Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody is “pleased the court recognized the state’s authority to rein in social media companies and upheld major portions of Florida’s law leading the way in doing so,” the Republican tweeted. “We will continue to vigorously defend Florida’s authority to demand accountability from Big Tech.”

The 11th Circuit ruling follows the 5th Circuit lifting a preliminary injunction on a similar Texas law. CCIA and NetChoice have filed an emergency challenge of that ruling at the Supreme Court.