Jamie Gorelick and Ari Holtzblatt publish an article for U.S. News - Best Lawyers "Best Law Firms" 2019 discussing whether internet speech is protected.
Excerpt: Accusations that prominent online platforms are stifling conservative voices have been much in the news lately—accusations that have turned into threats of investigations or enforcement actions. In late August, President Trump tweeted that various platforms are “suppressing voices of Conservatives,” pledging that this “very serious situation will be addressed.” In September, former Attorney General Jeff Sessions convened a meeting of state attorneys general to discuss whether the platforms are “hurting competition” and “intentionally stifling the free exchange of ideas.”
The companies in question have forcefully denied any anti-conservative bias in the operation of their algorithms or application of their community standards. Their algorithms, they say, are neutral tools for sorting and classifying information online, and their standards aim to create a safe environment, not to squelch particular views.
If litigation or enforcement nonetheless materializes, however, among the most significant issues that regulators, litigants, and courts will confront is whether the First Amendment prohibits second-guessing the platforms’ decisions about what content to disseminate.
