Moody v. NetChoice, LLC
View Official PDFBelow are plain-language sections to help you understand what the Court decided in Moody v. NetChoice, LLC and why it matters. Quotes are taken from the syllabus (the Court’s short summary at the start of the opinion).
Summary
A short, plain-English overview of Moody v. NetChoice, LLC.
The Supreme Court vacated and remanded the judgments of the Eleventh and Fifth Circuits regarding state laws from Florida and Texas that regulate social media platforms' content moderation. The Court found that neither circuit conducted a proper analysis of the facial First Amendment challenges. The case centers on whether these state laws infringe upon the platforms' editorial discretion under the First Amendment.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in Moody v. NetChoice, LLC.
The Court held that the judgments are vacated and the cases are remanded because neither the Eleventh Circuit nor the Fifth Circuit conducted a proper analysis of the facial First Amendment challenges.
Constitutional Concepts
These are the Constitution-related themes that appear in Moody v. NetChoice, LLC. Click a concept to see other cases that involve the same idea.
-
Why Free Speech is relevant to Moody v. NetChoice, LLC
The case primarily deals with First Amendment challenges related to content moderation by social media platforms.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)NetChoice LLC and the Computer & Communications Industry Association (collectively, NetChoice)—trade associations whose members include Facebook and YouTube—brought facial First Amendment challenges against the two laws.
-
Why Judicial Review is relevant to Moody v. NetChoice, LLC
The Court vacated and remanded the decisions due to improper analysis of the facial First Amendment challenges.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)The judgments are vacated, and the cases are remanded, because neither the Eleventh Circuit nor the Fifth Circuit conducted a proper analysis of the facial First Amendment challenges.
-
Why State–Federal Power is relevant to Moody v. NetChoice, LLC
The case involves state laws from Florida and Texas and their interaction with federal constitutional principles.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Texas's law, though, limits their power to do so. Its central provision prohibits covered platforms from 'censor[ing]' a 'user's expression' based on the 'viewpoint' it contains.
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in Moody v. NetChoice, LLC that support the summary and concepts above.
The judgments are vacated, and the cases are remanded, because neither the Eleventh Circuit nor the Fifth Circuit conducted a proper analysis of the facial First Amendment challenges.
The Court has repeatedly held that ordering a party to provide a forum for someone else's views implicates the First Amendment.
The proper analysis begins with an assessment of the state laws' scope.
