Judge blocks Trump-inspired Florida law cracking down on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube; DeSantis vows to appeal

1 July, 2021: A federal judge on Wednesday night overturned a Florida law that would penalize social media companies for banning politicians from speaking freely.

The ruling struck a blow to conservatives still fuming over the suspension of former President Donald Trump and allegations that Facebook, Twitter and Google’s YouTube censor right-wing views. In his ruling, U.S. District Judge Robert Hinkle of the Northern District of Florida said the law, which would have forced social media companies to allow speech even if it violated their rules, would likely be found unconstitutional.

The technology industry has challenged the law, which if it had gone in effect, would have come into binding on Thursday, saying it would violate the First Amendment rights of online businesses.

“The plaintiffs are likely to prevail on the merits of their claim that these statutes violate the First Amendment,” Hinkle wrote. “There is nothing that could be severed and survive.”

Following the passage of the law by Florida lawmakers, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube suspended Trump’s accounts following the January 6 attack on US capital.

It was signed in May by Trump ally and potential 2024 presidential candidate, Republican Gov. Ron de Santis, who backed the law as an end to the unbridled power of social media companies. A spokesman said de Santis intended to appeal. “We are disappointed with Judge Hinkel’s order and disagree with his commitment that the US Constitution protects the censorship of some individuals in Big Tech and the content of others,” Press Secretary Christina Pushaw said in a statement. “Governor de Santis continues to fight for freedom of expression and Big Tech discrimination.”

Under the law, the state allows large social media companies to impose fines of up to $250,000 a day if they remove or delete the account of a political candidate across a state and $25,000 a day for someone seeking public office. if they are seeking a local position. It also requires social media companies to notify users within seven days that they will be censored, and that they will be given time to correct the post.

Two technology trade groups, NetChoice and the Computer and Communications Industry Association, claimed Florida was attempting to censor free speech and expression by compelling social media companies to host speech and speakers they disagree with.

Their lawsuit alleged Florida’s new law was a “blatant attack” on the content moderation choices social media companies make daily to protect the public and advertisers from pornography, terrorist incitement, false propaganda spread by foreign actors, calls for genocide or race-based violence, COVID-19 vaccines disinformation, fraudulent schemes and other harmful, offensive or illegal material.

“America’s judiciary system is designed to protect our constitutional rights, and today’s ruling is no different, ensuring that Florida’s politically motivated law does not force Floridians to endure racial epithets, aggressive homophobia, pornographic material, beheadings, or other gruesome content just to use the internet,” Carl Szabo, vice president and general counsel of NetChoice, said in a statement.

Legal experts also questioned the law’s viability.

Eric Goldman, a law professor at Santa Clara University, told USA TODAY that the Florida law was bound to draw legal challenges as some of the new law’s provisions are “obviously unconstitutional.”

“The Supreme Court has made it clear that publishers have the freedom to pick and choose what content they want to publish, and the bill blatantly seeks to strip publishers of that freedom,” he said. “Florida residents should expect better from their legislators, and now they see their tax dollars spent defending an indefensible bill that never should have passed.”

Stay tuned to BaaghiTV for latest news and Updates!