The laws aim to prohibit social media companies from banning users based on political views, even if users violate platform policies.
The Supreme Court will consider whether the laws’ content moderation restrictions and their “individualized-explanation requirements” are compliant with the First Amendment.
Any outcome at the Supreme Court could have resounding implications for online speech.
Two lower courts, the Courts of Appeals for 5th and 11th circuits, had conflicting opinions on blocking and upholding the two states’ similar laws.
Two tech industry groups, the Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA) and NetChoice, challenged the laws in court.
They said the social media laws violate private companies’ First Amendment rights to decide what speech to host.
The tech groups cheered the court’s decision to hear the cases.
“This order is encouraging. It is high time that the Supreme Court resolves whether governments can force websites to publish dangerous content," CCIA President Matt Schruers said in a statement.
NetChoice litigation director Chris Marchese said in a statement, “The internet is a vital platform for free expression, and it must remain free from government censorship. We are confident the Court will agree.”
Read more in a full report at The Hill.com.
