| Moody v. NetChoice, LLC NetChoice, LLC v. Paxton | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued February 26, 2024 Decided July 1, 2024 | |
| Full case name | Ashley Moody, Attorney General of Florida, et al., v. NetChoice, LLC dba NetChoice, et al. NetChoice, LLC dba NetChoice, et al., v. Ken Paxton, Attorney General of Texas, et al. |
| Docket nos. | 22-277 22-555 |
| Questions presented | |
| 1. Whether the laws’ content-moderation restrictions comply with the First Amendment. 2. Whether the laws’ individualized-explanation requirements comply with the First Amendment | |
| Holding | |
| The judgments are vacated, and the cases are remanded, because neither the Eleventh Circuit nor the Fifth Circuit conducted a proper analysis of the facial First Amendment challenges to Florida and Texas laws regulating large internet platforms. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Kagan, joined by Roberts, Sotomayor, Kavanaugh, Barrett; Jackson (Parts I, II and III-A) |
| Concurrence | Barrett |
| Concurrence | Jackson (in part and in judgment) |
| Concurrence | Thomas (in judgment) |
| Concurrence | Alito (in judgment), joined by Thomas, Gorsuch |
Moody v. NetChoice, LLC and NetChoice, LLC v. Paxton, 603 U.S. ___ (2024), were United States Supreme Court cases related to protected speech under the First Amendment and content moderation by interactive service providers on the Internet under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. Moody and Paxton were challenges to two state statutes – enacted in Florida and Texas, respectively – that sought to limit this moderation. In July 2024, the justices vacated the lower-court decisions in both cases due to both courts failing to perform a full First Amendment assessment of the laws, and remanded them for further consideration.