The Lawfare Podcast Lawfare Daily: Anupam Chander, Kyle Langvhardt, and Alan Rozenshtein on the Supreme Court's Decision in Moody v. NetChoice
Jul 3, 2024
Anupam Chander, Kyle Langvhardt, and Alan Rozenshtein discuss the Supreme Court's decision in Moody v. NetChoice, exploring implications for content moderation, state regulation, and First Amendment principles. The conversation delves into complex opinions, concurrences by Justices Barrett, Jackson, Thomas, and Alito, and speculates on future outcomes. They analyze laws impacting platforms, algorithmic content moderation, and balancing speech interests online.
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
Surprise Ruling
- The Supreme Court's decision in Moody v. NetChoice surprised many, given the extensive litigation.
- The complexity of content moderation and the facial challenge posture contributed to the unexpected outcome.
Platform Diversity
- The justices realized the complexity of content moderation across diverse platforms like Reddit, Gmail, and Uber.
- The broad definition of social media in the laws further complicated the issue, covering platforms beyond the lawmakers' intended targets.
Expressive Moderation
- The justices debated whether content moderation is expressive activity, protected by the First Amendment.
- The use of AI in moderation adds complexity, blurring the line between editorial judgment and automated filtering.