The US Supreme Court on Friday agreed to rule on the legality of Republican-backed state laws in Texas and Florida that hamper the ability of social media companies to curb content on their platforms that those businesses deem objectionable.

The justices took up two cases involving challenges by technology industry groups who argued that these 2021 laws restricting the content-moderation practices of large social media platforms violate the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment protections for free speech. Lower courts split on the issue, striking down key provisions of the Florida law while upholding the Texas measure.

Among the industries challenging the laws are NetChoice and the Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA), an industry group whose members include Facebook parent Meta Platform Inc., Alphabet Inc.’s Google, which owns YouTube, as well as TikTok and X, formerly known as Twitter. Used to go, includes.

CCIA President Matt Schruers described the court’s handling of the case as encouraging.

“It is now time for the Supreme Court to decide whether governments can force websites to publish dangerous content. Telling private websites they must treat extremist hate equally is not unwise, it is unconstitutional There is, and we look forward to demonstrating it to the court,” Schruers said.

Supporters of the laws have argued that social media platforms have engaged in unfair censorship and have particularly silenced conservative voices. Advocates of content moderation have argued for the need to prevent the spread of misinformation and extremist causes.

President Joe Biden’s administration had told the judges in a court filing that the cases should be reviewed because state laws burden the companies’ rights.

The Justice Department said, “When a social media platform selects, edits, and arranges for third-party speech to be presented to the public, it engages in activity protected by the First Amendment.”

These cases test the argument made by industry groups that the First Amendment protects the editorial discretion of social media platforms and prevents governments from forcing companies to publish content against their will. The companies have said that without editorial discretion their websites would be filled with spam, bullying, extremism and hate speech.

Conservative critics of “Big Tech” companies have called the decision of the platform, formerly called Twitter, to suspend then-President Donald Trump shortly after the attack on the US Capitol by his supporters on January 6, 2021, a form of censorship. Example cited. , the company cited “the risk of further incitement of violence.” Trump’s account has since been restored under Elon Musk, who now owns the named company.

Texas Governor Greg Abbott, signing the legislation in 2021, said, “A dangerous movement is being led by some social media companies to silence conservative ideas and values. This is wrong and we will not allow it in Texas. “

The Texas law prohibits social media companies with at least 50 million monthly active users from “censoring” users based on “viewpoints” and allows users or the Texas Attorney General to sue to enforce it.

The Florida law requires large platforms to stop “hosting certain speeches that they would otherwise prefer not to host” by imposing censorship or restrictions on a political candidate or “journalistic enterprise”.

NetChoice Litigation Director Chris Marchese said, “Online services have a well-established First Amendment right to host, curate, and share content. The Internet is an important platform for free expression, and it should not be protected from government censorship.” Must remain free.”

Officials in Florida and Texas did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Florida is seeking to revive its law after the Atlanta-based 11th US Circuit Court of Appeals largely ruled against it. Industry groups are appealing a ruling by the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upholding the Texas law, which was blocked by the Supreme Court in an earlier phase of the case.

The Florida and Texas cases are scheduled to be heard in the court’s new nine-month term, which begins Monday.