President Trump’s executive order that aims to strip certain legal protections from social media companies such as Twitter and Facebook is making political waves, but legal experts say the measure is mostly toothless and vulnerable to court challenges.<\/p>\n
The order drew praise from Trump allies who share the president\u2019s view that Silicon Valley carries an anti-conservative bias. The practical effect of Trump\u2019s executive action, however, is likely to be minimal, according to telecommunications lawyers.<\/p>\n
The most ambitious component of the order is a proposal to peel back legal immunities that online platforms have enjoyed for almost 25 years. Those valuable protections fall under a provision of a 1996 law often referred to as Section 230.<\/p>\n
Trump\u2019s order argues that the section was never intended to grant blanket immunity \u201cto allow a handful of companies to grow into titans … and silence viewpoints that they dislike.\u201d<\/p>\n
Legal experts say that hollowing out the key provision of the 1996 Communications Decency Act would turn the internet upside down, shifting it from a system that has mostly relied on self-governance to one of federal oversight and civil litigation.<\/p>\n
Yet many legal observers don\u2019t see the order succeeding in reshaping how the internet is regulated. In addition to likely court challenges, the order also faces a few regulatory hurdles within the government.<\/p>\n
Under the order, the Trump administration will first direct an agency within the Commerce Department to file a petition with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to clarify the scope of Section 230. If the FCC were to issue a new rule, it could make social media platforms more liable for claims based on third-party content as well as their efforts to moderate their platforms, which currently enjoy legal cover as long as the platforms operate in good faith.<\/p>\n
As an independent agency, the FCC could refuse the request. The two Democratic members of the five-person commission have already announced their opposition to Trump\u2019s idea.<\/p>\n
\u201cSocial media can be frustrating. But an Executive Order that would turn the Federal Communications Commission into the President\u2019s speech police is not the answer,\u201d said Jessica Rosenworcel, one of the Democratic commissioners.<\/p>\n
FCC Chairman Ajit Pai (R) has not make his view publicly known, saying only that the commission “will carefully review any petition for rulemaking” filed by the Trump administration, adding, \u201cThis debate is an important one.\u201d<\/p>\n
Experts in telecommunications law say Pai is unlikely to undercut the current suite of legal protections.<\/p>\n
\u201cRight now, I have no doubt that Ajit Pai of the FCC is not going to move on this,\u201d said Berin Szoka, a senior fellow at TechFreedom, a free market think tank.<\/p>\n
Trump\u2019s plan would have a higher likelihood of succeeding if he were to win a second term and nominate a new FCC chairman who is more favorable to issuing a new sweeping rule.<\/p>\n
Commissioner Brendan Carr (R) has spoken favorably about Trump\u2019s proposal.<\/p>\n
\u201cI think given what we\u2019ve seen over the last few weeks, it makes sense to let the public weigh in and say, is that really what Congress meant when they passed and provided those special protections?\u201d Carr told Yahoo Finance on Thursday.<\/p>\n
Still, Szoka and other experts who spoke to The Hill agreed that a new rule by the FCC would invite legal challenges.<\/p>\n
Gigi Sohn, a distinguished fellow at the Georgetown Law Institute for Technology Law and Policy, said Trump would face an uphill battle in court.<\/p>\n
Conservatives are deeply divided over President Trump\u2019s executive order directing the federal government to consider stripping some of the legal protections afforded to the social media platforms.<\/p>\n
The order, which came after Twitter appended a fact check to one of the president\u2019s claims about mail voting fraud, would ostensibly make it easier to sue the social media platforms over content posted by the people who use their websites.<\/p>\n
Conservatives have long been concerned by what they view as political bias in Silicon Valley. Those concerns have grown as outlets such as Google, Twitter and Facebook have become primary sources of news aggregation for many consumers.<\/p>\n
But some conservatives are appalled by Trump\u2019s executive order, viewing it as an authoritarian power grab that will lead to government censorship, an explosion of frivolous lawsuits and a massive expansion of the regulatory state.<\/p>\n
Others are celebrating what they view as a long overdue crackdown on an industry they believe has grown too powerful and too willing to stifle conservative speech.<\/p>\n
The executive order has split traditional ideological allies, including Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Mike Lee (R-Utah), two of the most conservative members of the Senate.<\/p>\n
Lee described the order as a \u201cterrible precedent\u201d and a \u201cvery dangerous, slippery slope\u201d that is certain to be abused by future administrations seeking to regulate political speech.<\/p>\n
\u201cYou keep government as far away from it as you possibly can,\u201d Lee said on Fox News Radio\u2019s \u201cThe Guy Benson Show.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cGovernments have force as their only real weapon. You don\u2019t want force deciding the art of persuasion or deciding the art of communication with social media,\u201d he added.<\/p>\n
Cruz cheered the order, describing Big Tech as \u201cthe greatest threat facing our democracy\u201d and arguing that the social media platforms have been able to hide behind legal protections to \u201ctarget speech with which they disagree and advance their own political agendas.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201c[The tech industry] doesn\u2019t just stifle Americans\u2019 free speech, it shapes what Americans see, hear, and ultimately think about the major issues facing our country, including how those issues should be addressed and who should be elected to address them,\u201d Cruz said in a statement.<\/p>\n
At the heart of the debate is Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which shields online platforms from lawsuits stemming from content their users post online.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
President Trump’s executive order that aims...<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[7],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-25554","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-u-s-a"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lapost.us\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25554","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lapost.us\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lapost.us\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lapost.us\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lapost.us\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=25554"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/lapost.us\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25554\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":25555,"href":"https:\/\/lapost.us\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25554\/revisions\/25555"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lapost.us\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=25554"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lapost.us\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=25554"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lapost.us\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=25554"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}