Key facts
- A federal appeals court blocked a key provision of Texas' Securing Children Online through Parental Empowerment Act.
- The blocked provision required social media platforms to monitor and filter content related to self-harm, suicide, eating disorders, and other conduct.
- The court ruled that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act preempts the Texas law's monitoring and filtering requirement.
- An age-verification requirement in the Texas law was upheld by the court.
- The ruling was a 2-1 decision by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
A divided federal appeals court has blocked a significant portion of a Texas law aimed at protecting children online, ruling that federal legislation preempts the state's efforts. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans, in a 2-1 decision, found that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act shields social media companies from liability for user-generated content, thereby overriding Texas' requirement for platforms to monitor and filter content deemed harmful.
The Texas law, known as the Securing Children Online through Parental Empowerment Act (SCOPE Act) or House Bill 18, which took effect in September 2024, mandated that social media operators actively filter content promoting self-harm, suicide, eating disorders, substance abuse, stalking, bullying, and sexual abuse. Trade groups representing major tech companies, including Amazon, Google, and Meta Platforms, had challenged this provision.
Despite blocking the monitoring and filtering mandate, the appeals court upheld another key aspect of the Texas law: an age-verification requirement. The court also dismissed a lawsuit brought by Students Engaged in Advancing Texas, stating the nonprofit lacked standing.
Circuit Judge Dana Douglas, writing for the majority, acknowledged that Section 230 might function as a "get-out-of-jail-free card" but affirmed its broad protection against civil liability for third-party content. In a partial dissent, Circuit Judge James Ho argued that the Texas law focused on content curation rather than publication, and therefore should have been upheld.
Representatives from the challenging trade groups, CCIA and NetChoice, hailed the decision as a victory for free speech and against government censorship online. The office of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, which defended the law, did not immediately comment.