The Free Flow — March 6, 2025
FCC challenges Section 230 while blasting DSA, states grapple with age-verification laws, Mexico ignores free speech inquiry over congressman conviction, and more!
The Digital Age
» FCC Chairman Challenges Section 230
FCC Chairman Brendan Carr told Ben Smith of Semafor “I think it's appropriate for the FCC to say, let's take another look at Section 230" at a conference last week.
Background:
The digital news platform Semafor hosted a summit in Washington, D.C., called "Innovating to Restore Trust in News" on February 27, 2025.
Chairman Brendan Carr contributed to a chapter in Project 2025 on regulating social media companies. He had written, “the FCC should issue an order that interprets Section 230 in a way that eliminates the expansive, non-textual immunities that courts have read into the statute."
Carr suggests that the FCC should reinterpret Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which currently protects platforms from liability for user-generated content and their moderation decisions.
The First Amendment remains a strong protection against government regulation of private entities, as reaffirmed by the Supreme Court in Moody v Netchoice.
We currently don’t know which way FCC plans to approach Section 230. Carr’s letter to tech CEOs suggests that the FCC might be looking into interpreting the “good faith requirement” of Section 230. If that is the road FCC takes, it would give the government power to chill speech at a scale we have never seen before in the US.
In addition to not passing the First Amendment muster, FCC’s attempt to interpret Section also faces administrative law barriers. As Reason magazine and the administrative law experts at the Phoenix Center noted, Carr's proposal overlooks the Supreme Court's ruling in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which clarified that agencies like the FCC lack authority to reinterpret statutes without explicit congressional direction.
» U.S. House Judiciary Committee Subpoenas Tech Giants Over Foreign Censorship Concerns
The U.S. House Judiciary Committee issued subpoenas to eight major tech companies— Alphabet (Google), Meta (Facebook), Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, TikTok, X, and Rumble— seeking information regarding companies’ communications with foreign governments concerning content regulation and censorship.
Committee’s Concerns:
The committee is investigating how foreign laws and regulations may influence platforms to censor accessible content in the U.S., potentially limiting American’s access to legal speech. Foreign legislations under scrutiny include:
European Union's Digital Services Act (DSA): Aims to regulate online content and disinformation, imposing obligations on platforms to remove harmful content.
United Kingdom's Online Safety Act: Seeks to ensure online safety by mandating the removal of illegal or harmful content.
Australia's Proposed Legislation: Intends to require platforms to remove posts deemed misleading or deceptive by Australian regulators globally.
Brazil's Judicial Orders: Instances where Brazilian authorities have ordered the removal of content, raising concerns about extraterritorial enforcement affecting U.S. users.
» Utah Passes First-in-Nation App Store Age Verification Law, Faces Legal Challenges
Utah has become the first U.S. state to pass a law requiring app stores to verify users’ ages and obtain parental consent before minors can download apps (AP).
Background:
Utah’s App Store Accountability Act is now heading to Governor Spencer Cox, who is expected to sign it into law.
The bill shifts age verification responsibility from social media platforms to app stores, a move supported by Meta, Snap, and X, but strongly opposed by Apple and Google.
Tech industry reaction:
Meta and other platforms back the law, arguing that app stores are the best place to verify ages and manage parental controls.
Apple and Google argue the law violates privacy by forcing them to collect sensitive user data, including government-issued IDs.
The Chamber of Progress, a tech advocacy group, warns the law sets a dangerous First Amendment precedent and predicts inevitable legal challenges, citing similar laws that courts have blocked (Chamber of Progress).
Legal outlook:
» Judge Mulls Blocking Florida Social Media Law
On Friday, trade groups Computer & Communications Industry Association and NetChoice presented their case before U.S. District Judge Mark Walker, seeking a preliminary injunction to halt enforcement of certain provisions of the law while the legal battle continues.
Background:
Enacted in March 2024, Florida’s law prohibits children under 14 from having social media accounts and requires parental consent for 14- and 15-year-olds.
The Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA) and NetChoice—which represent communications companies—filed a lawsuit in October 2024, arguing the law violates First Amendment rights by restricting access to lawful content for minors and adults.
State attorneys claim the law addresses a mental health crisis by limiting minors' exposure to addictive social media features. Should a platform restrict “compulsive use,” it would receive an exemption from the law.
However, the trade associations argued the law infringes on free speech rights and that content restrictions cannot be separated from a feature integral to the platform, such as content scrolling.
» India’s Supreme Court Shows Support for Online Speech
The country’s Supreme Court opined that individuals should be given the chance to respond to a state’s takedown request for social media posts.
Background:
The Supreme Court’s decision came from a petition by the Software Freedom Law Center India (SFLC).
SFLC’s petition cited a 2009 law requiring regulators to notify the “person or intermediary” when removing a post. Due to the use of “or” in the law, regulators usually only inform the platform and not the individual.
The Supreme Court’s remarks so far do not represent its binding judgment but offer an indication of how it plans to rule in the case.
It has given the government three weeks to issue a response in defense of the current interpretation of the law.
» Mexican Government Ignores Free Speech Inquiry Over Convicted Politician’s Tweets
Mexico faces international scrutiny after failing to respond to a human rights inquiry into the conviction of former congressman Gabriel Quadri, who was punished for tweets questioning transgender rights.
Background:
Former Mexican congressman and presidential candidate Gabriel Quadri was convicted in 2022 as a “political violator against women” for posting on Twitter/X about gender ideology.
His tweets questioned whether transgender politicians should have “electoral positions that belong to women” and whether trans athletes should be involved in women’s sports.
Mexico’s highest electoral court ruled his posts discriminatory, ordering him to delete the tweets, issue a public apology, and complete government-mandated training on gender-based violence. He was also registered as a political violator for nearly three years.
Alliance Defending Freedom International took Quadri’s case to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, arguing Mexico’s actions violated his free speech rights.
The Commission requested a response from the Mexican government—but authorities failed to reply, triggering an expedited review.
The Brussels Effect
» FCC Chairman Blasts DSA
Brendan Carr recently criticized the European Union's Digital Services Act (DSA), calling it “something that is incompatible with both our free speech tradition in America and the commitments that these technology companies have made to a diversity of opinions."
Background:
Carr’s remarks came during the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona, Spain, echoing Vice President JD Vance’s speech at the Munich Security Conference.
A European Commission spokesperson responded to Carr's allegations, asserting that the DSA aims to protect “fundamental” rights and ensure online safety.
The Future of Free Speech has pointed out the danger the DSA poses to free speech online by requiring social media companies to remove “illegal content” or face potential fines — something that could lead to over-removal of legal content.
However, it is ironic that Carr is denouncing Europe’s heavy-handed regulation of online platforms while the FCC plans to reinterpret Section 230, which could incentivize platforms to adopt stricter content moderation policies in order to avoid liability for user-generated content.
Protest Watch
Trump Crackdowns on “Illegal” University Protests: The president announced on Truth Social that he would withhold federal funding from educational institutions permitting "illegal" protests, threatening agitators with imprisonment, deportation, arrests, or expulsion from their universities.
Executive Order Targets Columbia University Campus Protests: Trump’s Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism is considering Stop Work Orders for $51.4 million in federal contracts and reviewing over $5 billion in grants to asses Columbia University’s compliance with civil rights laws in the wake of allegations the school has failed to protect Jewish students from harassment during Pro-Palestinian protests.
Experts Warn Venezuela Over Enforced Disappearances of Activists: UN experts have urged Venezuela’s government to disclose the fate of opposition figures, pro-democracy activists, and human rights defenders who have been forcibly disappeared since the 2024 presidential elections. They warn that the systematic use of short-term enforced disappearances is being used to silence dissent and called on Venezuela to comply with international human rights law.
Idaho House Unanimously Passes Anti-SLAPP Bill to Protect Free Speech: The bill allows for anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) motions in legal proceedings, adding Idaho to a growing list of states strengthening anti-SLAPP protections.
Press Freedom
Report Lists Turkey and Serbia Among Europe’s Worst Media Freedom Violators:
A new Council of Europe report warns of persistent threats to press freedom across the continent, with Turkey and Serbia ranking among the worst offenders.
The report documented 226 alerts on attacks against journalists in 2024, including physical violence (78), harassment (77), and imprisonment (51). Turkey remains one of Europe’s top jailers of journalists, with 27 reporters behind bars.
The report also highlights Russia, Hungary, and Turkey as models of media control for other autocratic governments and warns of rising AI-generated disinformation campaigns, citing a deepfake attack on Serbian journalist Stevan Dojcinovic.
Jerusalem Post Sounds Alarm on Israeli Censorship: The Israeli magazine criticized a police raid on an East Jerusalem bookshop for allegedly glorifying the Intifada. The article notes IDF censorship is on the rise, especially the issuance of “gag orders” for vaguely defined “security purposes”—which could include criticizing the Israeli government or Prime Minister Netanyahu.
EU Flags Rule of Law Concerns Over Greece’s Fine on Broadcaster: The European Commission has expressed concerns over media freedom and SLAPPs in Greece after the country’s broadcasting regulator fined Mega TV €90,000 for defaming Grigoris Dimitriadis, a former aide to the prime minister linked to the Predator spyware scandal.
Quick Hits
VOA Puts Journalist on Leave for Criticizing Trump: The government-funded but nominally editorially-independent news organization placed the chief national correspondent, Steve Herman, on “excused absence” after he made a critical post of the U.S. President on X.
Federal Judge Allows Lawsuit Against Florida Book Removals: The suit against the State Board of Education and certain school boards challenges the removal of specific books from school libraries under a 2023 law that restricts materials deemed "pornographic" or describing "sexual conduct."
The Supreme Court Declines Challenge Against Bias-Response Programs: The court declined to hear a suit challenging Indiana University’s bias-response team, effectively upholding the program that allows students to report incidents of bias or prejudice. The Justices did not offer an explanation for their decision, while Justices Thomas and Alito stated publicly they would have heard the case.
U.S. Attorney Investigating Georgetown Law DEI Content: A recent inquiry launched by the U.S. Attorney for Washington, D.C., Ed Martin, is putting pressure on Georgetown Law to remove DEI from its teaching, another clear overstep on First Amendment grounds for the prosecutor. It also suggests students from institutions that continue to teach DEI may be barred from federal internships and employment.
Georgetown Law responded with a scathing rebuke of Martin’s demands.
Majority Support Moderation on Social Media Platforms, Global Survey Shows: A new global survey by Oxford University and the Technical University of Munich reveals that most people favor content moderation over unrestricted free speech on social media. 79% of respondents support removing incitements to violence, with the strongest approval in Germany, Brazil, and Slovakia (86%) and the lowest in the U.S. (63%). While platform operators are seen as the primary enforcers of online safety, opinions vary on whether governments or individual users should share responsibility.
Detention of Journalist in Russia Over Ukraine Conflict Sparks International Concern: The Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) has called on Russian authorities to drop charges against journalist Ekaterina Barabash, who faces up to 10 years in prison for criticizing Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. She was charged under Russia’s "fake news" law, which has been widely used to silence war critics.
Taliban Escalate Media Crackdown in Afghanistan: Reporters Without Borders (RSF) warns that the Taliban have intensified censorship of the press, banning political programs on television, temporarily shutting down the women’s station Radio Begum, and arresting two media workers in February alone. RSF notes that press freedom in Afghanistan is on the brink of extinction as the Taliban continues to tighten control over news coverage, restrict female journalists, and suppress dissenting voices.