TALLAHASSEE, Fla.—Today, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida denied both parties’ motions for summary judgment in NetChoice & CCIA v. Uthmeier, the five-year challenge to Florida’s unconstitutional SB 7072. While NetChoice and CCIA would have welcomed a final ruling today, the court’s order firmly reaffirms the constitutional principles that have protected Floridians’ access to a free internet since this litigation began, and it flatly dispatches Florida’s only remaining defense.
“Florida’s central argument was that the First Amendment simply does not apply to websites’ editorial decisions. That argument did not survive today,” said Paul Taske, Director of the NetChoice Litigation Center. “We would have preferred to end this at summary judgment after five years of litigation, but we go to trial with full confidence that a full record will only make the constitutional problems with SB 7072 clearer. This law was designed from the start to punish websites for their political viewpoints. That is precisely what the First Amendment forbids.”
Today’s order leaves no doubt where the First Amendment stands. The court confirmed that website content curation, including so-called “mixed curation” that blends editorial standards with algorithmic ranking, receives First Amendment protection. The government cannot regulate its way around the First Amendment simply because websites use algorithms. The court rejected that argument as “plainly incorrect,” citing the Supreme Court’s own analysis in Moody v. NetChoice and the long line of precedents it discussed.
SB 7072 has been blocked from taking effect since June 30, 2021.
Read today’s order here.
Find case resources for NetChoice & CCIA v. Uthmeier here.
Please contact press@netchoice.org with inquiries.