About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

33 DePaul J. Art Tech. & Intell. Prop. L 1 (2023)

handle is hein.journals/dael33 and id is 1 raw text is: MORALES: TEXAS' WAR ON SOCIAL MEDIA: CENSORSHIP OR FALSE FLAG TEXAS' WAR ON SOCIAL MEDIA: CENSORSHIP OR FALSE FLAG Leni Morales* I. INTRODUCTION The First Amendment of the United States Constitution states, Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.' To many, the right to freedom of speech is a pillar upon which our Republic is built. However, the First Amendment raises a question that has come into the purview of the courts time and time again; a question that appears to be simple, but is extremely complicated: what qualifies as speech that is protected? In Hurley v. Irish-American Gay, Lesbian & Bisexual Group of Boston, the Supreme Court identified that First Amendment protections apply to more than the traditional definition of speech, being simply things spoken. First Amendment protections also apply to things not spoken, such as actions taken, actions not taken, editorial decisions, and more.2 Understanding that a variety of expressions qualify as speech, the next question is who, or what, gets those protections. While there are a number of legal and historical scholars that claim to understand what the Founding Fathers intended when the First Amendment was drafted, it cannot be said that the Founding Fathers contemplated social media platforms, let alone the modern world and all of our social accoutrement. Those of us currently living have difficulty deciding how to classify social media platforms and the protections that they should be afforded. Around the 1800s, there was a struggle with the idea of a privately held corporation being forced to comply with the speech requirements dictated by the government, and the idea that a * Leni Morales is a 2023 DePaul University College of Law J.D. Candidate. Leni is the Vice President of SBA, and a contributor to the DePaul Journal of Art, Technology and Intellectual Property. Leni graduated from Texas Tech University where she received her Bachelor of Arts in Theater. She is greatly interested in ever changing Internet Law and is pursuing privacy certifications. ' U.S. Const. amend. I 2 Hurley v. Irish-Am. Gay, Lesbian & Bisexual Grp. of Bos., 515 U.S. 557, 570 (1995).

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most