Two pending Supreme Court cases interpreting a 1996 law could drastically alter the way we interact online. That law, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, is often disparaged as a handout to Big Tech, but that misses the point. Section 230
promotes free speech by removing strong incentives for platforms to limit what we can say and do online.
Under Section 230, platforms generally may not be held liable for the content posted by users. Without this protection,
important speech such as communication about abortion, especially in states where abortion is outlawed, could be silenced. Movements like #MeToo and #BLM may not have been able to catch on if platforms were worried that they'd be sued, even improperly,
for defamation or other claims. People could have found their voices censored, especially when talking about ideas that are under political attack today: race and racism , sexuality , and gender justice . The internet as we know it would be a very
...see the full article from aclu.org