Clarence Thomas wants to check Big Tech. Texas could be his shot.

Thomas has argued social media companies are like common carriers. Texas’s social media law, which could make its way to SCOTUS, makes a similar case.

Justice Clarence Thomas.

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has been itching for a case that could rein in Section 230.

Photographer: Al Drago/Bloomberg via Getty Images

For years, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has been openly itching for a case that would give the court an opportunity to rein in Section 230 protections. Now, Texas’ controversial social media “censorship” law could give him an opening.

The Texas law prohibits tech platforms with more than 50 million monthly users from moderating content on the basis of “viewpoint,” an ill-defined concept that is ripe for bad-faith interpretation. On Wednesday, a Fifth Circuit appeals court lifted an injunction on the law, which will now take effect in the state.

Tech giants including Meta, Google, Snap, Twitter, TikTok and others are now scrambling for a legal remedy. None of those companies would share information with Protocol about what happens next. In all likelihood, they’re still figuring it out themselves.

One option on the table, though, would be for the plaintiffs in the case — industry groups NetChoice and the Computer and Communications Industry Association — to try their luck with the Supreme Court. In a statement, CCIA president Matt Schruers said, “No option is off the table.”

For Thomas, at least, such a case might be welcome. He’s argued in the past that tech platforms are "sufficiently akin" to common carriers and that the court will soon have no choice but to “address how our legal doctrines apply to highly concentrated, privately owned information infrastructure such as digital platforms." Thomas’s public turn against tech came shortly after he hired a clerk who was previously a lawyer for noted Sec. 230 critic Sen. Josh Hawley.

"He took the opportunity to rip on Sec. 230 in [a] case that didn’t even present the issue in any way at all. So one that presents the issue, I think he’ll certainly jump on that,” said David Greene, senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

It’s possible the Supreme Court could take up the case on its shadow docket, without hearing oral arguments — an outcome University of Texas at Austin law professor Steve Vladeck, who is writing a book on the shadow docket, believes is likely. “I just don’t see how social media companies can risk having this law stay on the books,” Vladeck said. “There will be a ton of pressure to ask the Supreme Court to vacate the stay.” Vladeck pointed to a similar shadow docket decision in March when the Court overturned the Fifth Circuit’s block on the Biden administration’s military vaccine mandate.

Not everyone shares Vladeck’s certainty. According to Corbin Barthold, internet policy counsel for the think tank TechFreedom, “it is still extraordinarily rare for the Supreme Court to review any aspect of an appeal before that appeal is complete.” While the Fifth Circuit lifted the injunction on the Texas law, suggesting it’s likely to uphold the law on appeal, the appeal itself is still pending.

But, Vladeck said, while this has been the case historically, the Supreme Court has become much more active in intervening, particularly in cases that are likely to cause a huge disruption, like this one. “The reality here is that the Fifth Circuit stay is going to create such an immediate impact that it’s going to be hard for the court to think that it's appropriate to wait,” Vladeck said.

Even if the case doesn’t make it to the shadow docket, though, it could still wind its way to the Supreme Court; it’ll just take longer. While NetChoice and CCIA fight it out in the Fifth Circuit, the 11th Circuit is also considering a similar social media law in Florida, and Barthold expects that court to be more deliberate in its decision than the Fifth Circuit was. Being more deliberate than the Fifth Circuit, incidentally, won’t be much of a challenge: The court lifted the injunction on the Texas law just two days after hearing oral arguments, without so much as an opinion. During the arguments, the judges seemed perplexed about whether Twitter is even a website. “To just issue an order like this with no opinion on such an unprecedented law,” Barthold said, “it had a flavor of spite to it.”

If the 11th and Fifth Circuits split, the Supreme Court might take up the case the old-fashioned way, with oral arguments and all. “Then I would flip my whole analysis and say it is likely, even probable, that the Supreme Court would hear that case,” he said.

The question then is, would Thomas’ fellow conservative justices see things the same way he does? That answer is still very unknown. So far, everything Thomas has written on Sec. 230 has only had his name attached.

If history serves, his conservative colleagues would be a hard sell. In 2019, all of the conservative justices, including Thomas, joined Justice Brett Kavanaugh in a decision that found public-access channels can’t violate people’s constitutional rights because, though they provide a public forum for speech, they are not themselves state actors. That makes them seem unlikely candidates to rally behind the Texas law, which would also effectively turn tech platforms into common carriers.

One thing is certain, though. If the Supreme Court were to take up the case in this way, it would take time, maybe even years. In the meantime, tech platforms would have to find a way to live with the Texas law as it is — or die trying.

With additional reporting by Ben Brody.


How 'Zuck Bucks' saved the 2020 election — and fueled the Big Lie

The true story of how Mark Zuckerberg and Priscilla Chan’s $419 million donation became the 2020 election’s most enduring conspiracy theory.

Mark Zuckerberg is smack in the center of one of the 2020 election’s multitudinous conspiracies.

Illustration: Mike McQuade; Photos: Getty Images

If Mark Zuckerberg could have imagined the worst possible outcome of his decision to insert himself into the 2020 election, it might have looked something like the scene that unfolded inside Mar-a-Lago on a steamy evening in early April.

There in a gilded ballroom-turned-theater, MAGA world icons including Kellyanne Conway, Corey Lewandowski, Hope Hicks and former president Donald Trump himself were gathered for the premiere of “Rigged: The Zuckerberg Funded Plot to Defeat Donald Trump.”

Keep Reading Show less
Issie Lapowsky

Issie Lapowsky ( @issielapowsky) is Protocol's chief correspondent, covering the intersection of technology, politics, and national affairs. She also oversees Protocol's fellowship program. Previously, she was a senior writer at Wired, where she covered the 2016 election and the Facebook beat in its aftermath. Prior to that, Issie worked as a staff writer for Inc. magazine, writing about small business and entrepreneurship. She has also worked as an on-air contributor for CBS News and taught a graduate-level course at New York University's Center for Publishing on how tech giants have affected publishing.

Sponsored Content

Why the digital transformation of industries is creating a more sustainable future

Qualcomm’s chief sustainability officer Angela Baker on how companies can view going “digital” as a way not only toward growth, as laid out in a recent report, but also toward establishing and meeting environmental, social and governance goals.

Three letters dominate business practice at present: ESG, or environmental, social and governance goals. The number of mentions of the environment in financial earnings has doubled in the last five years, according to GlobalData: 600,000 companies mentioned the term in their annual or quarterly results last year.

But meeting those ESG goals can be a challenge — one that businesses can’t and shouldn’t take lightly. Ahead of an exclusive fireside chat at Davos, Angela Baker, chief sustainability officer at Qualcomm, sat down with Protocol to speak about how best to achieve those targets and how Qualcomm thinks about its own sustainability strategy, net zero commitment, other ESG targets and more.

Keep Reading Show less
Chris Stokel-Walker

Chris Stokel-Walker is a freelance technology and culture journalist and author of "YouTubers: How YouTube Shook Up TV and Created a New Generation of Stars." His work has been published in The New York Times, The Guardian and Wired.


From frenzy to fear: Trading apps grapple with anxious investors

After riding the stock-trading wave last year, trading apps like Robinhood have disenchanted customers and jittery investors.

Retail stock trading is still an attractive business, as shown by the news that crypto exchange FTX is dipping its toes in the market by letting some U.S. customers trade stocks.

Photo: Lam Yik/Bloomberg via Getty Images

For a brief moment, last year’s GameStop craze made buying and selling stocks cool, even exciting, for a new generation of young investors. Now, that frenzy has turned to fear.

Robinhood CEO Vlad Tenev pointed to “a challenging macro environment” marked by rising prices and interest rates and a slumping market in a call with analysts explaining his company’s lackluster results. The downturn, he said, was something “most of our customers have never experienced in their lifetimes.”

Keep Reading Show less
Benjamin Pimentel

Benjamin Pimentel ( @benpimentel) covers crypto and fintech from San Francisco. He has reported on many of the biggest tech stories over the past 20 years for the San Francisco Chronicle, Dow Jones MarketWatch and Business Insider, from the dot-com crash, the rise of cloud computing, social networking and AI to the impact of the Great Recession and the COVID crisis on Silicon Valley and beyond. He can be reached at bpimentel@protocol.com or via Google Voice at (925) 307-9342.


Broadcom is reportedly in talks to acquire VMware

It hasn't been long since it left the ownership of Dell Technologies.

Photo: Yichuan Cao/NurPhoto via Getty Images

Broadcom is said to be in discussions with VMware to buy the cloud computing company for as much as $50 billion.

Keep Reading Show less
Jamie Condliffe

Jamie Condliffe ( @jme_c) is the executive editor at Protocol, based in London. Prior to joining Protocol in 2019, he worked on the business desk at The New York Times, where he edited the DealBook newsletter and wrote Bits, the weekly tech newsletter. He has previously worked at MIT Technology Review, Gizmodo, and New Scientist, and has held lectureships at the University of Oxford and Imperial College London. He also holds a doctorate in engineering from the University of Oxford.


Should startups be scared?

Stock market turmoil is making VCs skittish. Could now be the best time to start a company?

Dark times could be ahead for startups.

Photo by Startaê Team on Unsplash

This week, we break down why Elon Musk is tweeting about the S&P 500's ESG rankings — and why he might be right to be mad. Then we discuss how tech companies are failing to prevent mass shootings, and why the new Texas social media law might make it more difficult for platforms to be proactive.

Then Protocol's Biz Carson, author of the weekly VC newsletter Pipeline, joins us to explain the state of venture capital amidst plunging stocks and declining revenues. Should founders start panicking? The answer might surprise you.

Keep Reading Show less
Caitlin McGarry

Caitlin McGarry is the news editor at Protocol.

Latest Stories