Favorite Once again, the Texas legislature is coming after the most common method of safe and effective abortion today—medication abortion. Senate Bill (S.B.) 2880* seeks to prevent the sale and distribution of abortion pills—but it doesn’t stop there. By restricting access to certain information online, the bill tries to keep people from learning about abortion drugs,…
All posts tagged Content Blocking
Stop Censoring Abortion: The Fight for Reproductive Rights in the Digital Age
Favorite With reproductive rights under fire across the U.S. and globally, access to accurate abortion information has never been more critical—especially online. That’s why reproductive health and rights organizations have turned to online platforms to share essential, sometimes life-saving, guidance and resources. Whether it’s how to access information about abortion medication, where to find clinics,…
Canada’s Leaders Must Reject Overbroad Age Verification Bill
Favorite Canadian lawmakers are considering a bill, S-210, that’s meant to benefit children, but would sacrifice the security, privacy, and free speech of all internet users. First introduced in 2023, S-210 seeks to prevent young people from encountering sexually explicit material by requiring all commercial internet services that “make available” explicit content to adopt age…
EFF and Partners to EU Commissioner: Prioritize User Rights, Avoid Politicized Enforcement of DSA Rules
Favorite EFF, Access Now, and Article 19 have written to EU Commissioner for Internal Market Thierry Breton calling on him to clarify his understanding of “systemic risks” under the Digital Services Act, and to set a high standard for the protection of fundamental rights, including freedom of expression and of information. The letter was in…
In These Five Social Media Speech Cases, Supreme Court Set Foundational Rules for the Future
Favorite The U.S. Supreme Court addressed government’s various roles with respect to speech on social media in five cases reviewed in its recently completed term. The through-line of these cases is a critically important principle that sets limits on government’s ability to control the online speech of people who use social media, as well as…
Victory! D.C. Circuit Rules in Favor of Animal Rights Activists Censored on Government Social Media Pages
Favorite In a big win for free speech online, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled that a federal agency violated the First Amendment when it blocked animal rights activists from commenting on the agency’s social media pages. We filed an amicus brief in the case, joined by the Foundation for Individual…
To Sixth Circuit: Government Officials Should Not Have Free Rein to Block Critics on Their Social Media Accounts When Used For Governmental Purposes
Favorite Legal intern Danya Hajjaji was the lead author of this post. The Sixth Circuit must carefully apply a new “state action” test from the U.S. Supreme Court to ensure that public officials who use social media to speak for the government do not have free rein to infringe critics’ First Amendment rights, EFF and…
No Country Should be Making Speech Rules for the World
Favorite It’s a simple proposition: no single country should be able to restrict speech across the entire internet. Any other approach invites a swift relay race to the bottom for online expression, giving governments and courts in countries with the weakest speech protections carte blanche to edit the internet. Unfortunately, governments, including democracies that care…
U.S. Supreme Court Does Not Go Far Enough in Determining When Government Officials Are Barred from Censoring Critics on Social Media
Favorite After several years of litigation across the federal appellate courts, the U.S. Supreme Court in a unanimous opinion has finally crafted a test that lower courts can use to determine whether a government official engaged in “state action” such that censoring individuals on the official’s social media page—even if also used for personal purposes—would…
Lawmakers: Ban TikTok to Stop Election Misinformation! Same Lawmakers: Restrict How Government Addresses Election Misinformation!
Favorite In a case being heard Monday at the Supreme Court, 45 Washington lawmakers have argued that government communications with social media sites about possible election interference misinformation are illegal. Agencies can’t even pass on information about websites state election officials have identified as disinformation, even if they don’t request that any action be taken,…