Supreme Court to take up social media free speech law signed by Gov. DeSantis

FLORIDA, Fla. - The Supreme Court will weigh a Florida law championed by Gov. Ron DeSantis that allows for fines against social media companies that deplatform political candidates.

The 2021 law he signed was in reaction to Twitter's post-January 6th insurrection ban of Donald Trump and YouTube's censoring of anti-mask COVID videos.

"You had a lot of arrogance that it's our way or the highway,"  the Gov. said during a press conference last December.

The law allows fines of $250,000 a day for social media sites that remove statewide candidates from their platforms, $25,000 for banning other candidates and even allows regular people to sue if they get banned.

READ: Busch Gardens new roller coaster ‘Phoenix Rising’ set to open next spring

"At what point does power become so vast, so great that you're the equivalent of a state?" asked legal analyst Dan Eaton.

The governor, though, praises Elon Musk for loosening Twitter, now X's restrictions.

The free speech group suing Florida says he's proving their point that private means private.

"While the law may have stemmed from a genuine place of concern about protecting the marketplace of ideas, in reality, it is the government trying to control how we interact with each other online, how private businesses provide their services," said Chris Marchese, the director of litigation for NetChoice, a free-speech firm suing Florida.

READ: Florida lawmaker proposes designating State Road A1A as 'Jimmy Buffett Memorial Highway'

While the current court is generally conservative on issues like abortion, Affirmative Action and the environment, Eaton says they have generally avoided taking on First Amendment cases.

He argues the very conservative Justice Clarence Thomas has tipped his hand.

"He at least is willing to consider treating social media giants as government actors," said Eaton.

NetChoice warns a ruling in favor of those laws would enshrine the right of an extremist, or even a terrorist, to use private platforms to spread views that could breed hate.

"The Supreme Court has said in the past that the First Amendment applies fully to the Internet and to online speech," said Marchese. "But our case is really going to be the first time that the Supreme Court engages with these issues in the modern era."

A date for arguments has not been set, which means lower court rulings blocking the laws are still in effect.

The state said they had no comment beyond what was in their legal filings. 

However, they have previously said social media platforms should not be treated as a newspaper but as a common carrier of other's messages.