On June 29, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court delivered a landmark ruling in the cases of NetChoice v. Paxton and Moody v. NetChoice, addressing state-level social media legislation. The court unanimously decided to return these cases to lower courts for further analysis, with the majority opinion penned by Justice Elena Kagan. The cases revolve around 2021 laws from Florida and Texas aimed at regulating social media content moderation, particularly concerning political speech. Florida’s SB 7072 allowed political candidates to sue social media companies for “deplatforming,” while Texas’s HB 20 sought to prevent social media platforms from removing content based on viewpoints. Both laws also mandated transparency in content moderation decisions.

The Supreme Court’s decision underscored that the lower courts hadn’t adequately considered the First Amendment implications of these laws. The ruling could have significant implications for the future of online free speech and social media regulation, affecting not only large platforms but also smaller ones and their users.

Additionally, in a separate ruling on June 30, 2024, the Supreme Court declared that former President Donald Trump has substantial immunity from prosecution for actions taken during his presidency. The 6-3 decision along partisan lines means that Trump is unlikely to face trial for allegedly attempting to subvert the 2020 election before the 2024 election. The ruling highlighted the distinction between a president’s official acts, which are broadly immune, and private conduct. The case will now return to the lower court to determine the specifics. Chief Justice John Roberts emphasized the need for this immunity to maintain an “energetic, independent executive,” while the dissenting liberal justices argued this decision dangerously elevates the president “above the law.”