Tech Policy Podcast

Mike Masnick (Techdirt) and Santana Boulton (TechFreedom) discuss the FTC’s “Inquiry on Tech Censorship.”Topics include:What are we doing here?The myth surrounding Hunter Biden’s laptopDoes the FTC know how terms of service work?Does the FTC know how cartels work?Content moderation is pro-free speechJawboning on steroidsLinks:Copia Institute FTC comments (https://tinyurl.com/y6r2b82f)TechFreedom FTC comments (https://tinyurl.com/mccbwa2h)Hello! You’ve Been Referred Here Because You’re Wrong About Twitter And Hunter Biden’s Laptop (https://tinyurl.com/685fjmk8)Moderating Eating Disorder Content Is Harder Than You Think (https://tinyurl.com/r37nvnjb)Why Is The Republican Party Obsessed With Social Media? (https://tinyurl.com/bdec2u9w)

Anna Gomez, an FCC Commissioner, passionately advocates for free speech and shares insights at the 2025 TechFreedom / CEI Policy Forum. She discusses the chilling effects of government influence on media and the necessity of a diverse regulatory body. Gomez contemplates the implications of Section 230 on online platforms and challenges the perception of agency power through recent court rulings. She underlines the risks of capitulation to government pressure, urging corporate leaders to safeguard democracy and the First Amendment.

Vidushi Dyall, Director of Legal Analysis at the Chamber of Progress, shares her insights from the Google search antitrust remedies trial. She discusses the potential outcomes, including whether Google will have to sell Chrome or change its default search arrangements with Apple. The conversation dives into how advancing AI technology is influencing legal frameworks and what that means for competition. Dyall sheds light on the challenges of regulating Big Tech and the implications for both innovation and consumer welfare in a rapidly evolving digital landscape.

Jess Miers, Assistant Professor of Law at the University of Akron, joins to unpack the Take It Down Act, a controversial federal bill aimed at non-consensual intimate imagery. She critiques its potential for widespread censorship and the vague definitions that could lead to overreach. Miers highlights the disconnect among politicians regarding innovative tech policies and the risks for marginalized communities. The conversation sheds light on the challenges of enforcement and the regulation of online content, raising crucial questions about free speech.

Eric Goldman (Santa Clara Law) discusses his new paper, “The ‘Segregate-and-Suppress’ Approach to Regulating Child Safety Online.”Topics include:The many kinds of online age-verification lawAge verification as an information problemFancy tech as deus ex machinaData collection today; state surveillance tomorrowWhat about devices and app stores?The internet and Maslow’s hierarchy of needsChild safety: it takes a villageThe parental consent nightmareLinks:The “Segregate-and-Suppress” Approach to Regulating Child Safety OnlineAge-Verification Laws Are a Verified MistakeTech Policy Podcast 354: Online Age Verification (Sucks)

The recent push for backdoors in encryption by the UK government raises critical privacy issues, echoing reactions from U.S. lawmakers. A stark contrast in government trust between the UK and the US highlights the Online Safety Act's threats to free speech. The UK’s propaganda depicts encryption as dangerous, downplaying its role in safeguarding dissent. Discussions on government surveillance challenge the balance between security and individual rights, while examining the implications of judicial authority on civil liberties.

Liz Dye and Andrew Torrez (Law & Chaos) discuss the Trump administration’s renditions to El Salvador, its purges of Justice Department lawyers, and other heinous things you should worry about.Links:Law & ChaosTrump v. J.G.G. (SCOTUS)Noem v. Abrego Garcia (4th Cir.)Trump docket w/ CourtListener linksThe Constitutional Crisis Is Here

In a crossover episode with the Rethinking Antitrust podcast, Bilal Sayyed (TechFreedom) questions our host, Corbin Barthold, about the presidential removal power, Humphrey’s Executor, the FTC, the Trump administration, and the Roberts Court.Note: This episode was recorded just before the D.C. Circuit issued an interlocutory order addressing the president’s removal power as to the NLRB and the MSPB. That order is in the links.Links:Rethinking AntitrustThe Executive Power of RemovalWill the Supreme Court Face Down Trump or Flinch?The D.C. Circuit’s post-recording order

Chris Marchese, the director of litigation at NetChoice, dives into the organization's mission to defend free speech online. He shares insights on numerous lawsuits regarding internet regulations, including Texas’s HB 20 and California's age-appropriate design code. Marchese argues against the idea of age-gating the web and discusses the implications of targeting social media that can harm smaller platforms. The conversation also addresses the balance between child protection and First Amendment rights in the digital landscape.

Anupam Chander (Georgetown Law) discusses the many bad precedents—legal, geopolitical, and otherwise—that we’ll be living with in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the TikTok ban.Links:TikTok v. Garland Opens the Door to Global CensorshipHarvard Law School Rappaport Forum: TikTok and Free SpeechThe National Security InternetTech Policy Podcast 399: What the TikTok Ruling Should Have Said