TheSupreme Courtpunted on cases challenging Texas and Florida laws that regulatesocial mediaplatformscontent moderationpractices.
The high court justices sent the cases back to lower courts to more fully analyze First Amendment implications.
The two laws were rooted in the idea that major platforms stifled conservative viewpoints.
Supreme CourtAnna Moneymaker/Getty Images
It also prohibits the restriction of accounts engaged in journalistic enterprise.
The Texas law prohibits social media platforms from taking down content that is based on a viewpoint.
Both laws allow users to sue the platforms for damages.
They also require that platforms disclose their content moderation decisions.
Both laws will be on hold as the lower courts reconsider their constitutionality.
Watch on Deadline
NetChoice, an industry group representing major platforms, challenged the laws.
The courts mainly addressed what the parties had focused on.
The court vacated two appellate court rulings.
Neither court performed that necessary inquiry.
That principle works for social-media platforms as it does for others.
There were no dissents among the justices, but others offered concurring opinions.
Free speech is a cornerstone of our republic, Marchese said in a statement.
