Freedom of Speech, Science, Religion, and Inquiry

• Censorship is a grim reality in unfree societies such as as China and Russia. Unfortunately, a lesser but still dangerous version of it has also become part of American life. 

• This web page links to the amicus briefs for freedom of speech in the crucial case of Netchoice v. Paxton. Much will depend on the outcome. 

• TO SKIP TO THE BRIEFS, JUST SCROLL DOWN

• FOR A PRESS RELEASE, GO TO https://galileosociety.org/about-web-censorship

• In 2021, Texas passed an anti-censorship law, known as HB 20. It bars the dominant social media platforms from discriminating against their users on the basis of viewpoint. And it requires them to provide information about the censorship.

• The statute was carefully written to comply with the First Amendment and Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. It finds that the dominant social media platforms are common carriers--in other words, that they are information conduits with nondiscrimination duties to the public. 

• Common carrier law has long been the foundation of American anti-discrimination law. For centuries, it has been applied to communications common carriers without being thought to conflict with the First Amendment. On the contrary, it protects  freedom of speech.

• The dominant social media platforms, acting through an intermediary called Netchoice, challenged the Texas anti-censorship statute. They sought a preliminary injunction against the state's Attorney General and prevailed before the district court. But the district court opinion was highly questionable, and the state is now challenging its injunction. 

• The following briefs make powerful arguments for the lawfulness of the Texas statute. They are important statements on behalf of freedom from censorship.