Happy Nice Mall

The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday temporarily blocked Texas from enforcing its new social media law, which aims to prevent digital censorship by directing platforms with more than 50 million active users not to discriminate against Texan viewpoints.

By a 5-4 vote, the judges accepted the tech industries’ emergency motion to overturn a federal appeals court that allowed Texas uncensored law to go into effect.

The law targeted leading platforms like Twitter and Facebook, preventing them from blocking or de-ranking posts.

The law is now suspended again, while a case is played out in the lower courts.

The majority voting in favor of the blockade included Chief Justice John Roberts, Stephen Breyer, Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett and Sonia Sotomayor. The order came without comment.

The four dissenting judges were Judges Samuel A. Alito, Elena Kagan, Neil M. Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas.

“While I can understand the court’s obvious desire to delay enforcement of HB20 while an appeal is pending, the injunction granted by the district court was itself a significant interference with state sovereignty and Texas should not need to seek prior authorization from the federal courts. Judge Alito before his laws go into effect. “The appeal court, after briefing and oral argument, decided that the district court’s decision should be stayed and that a judgment on the merits could be expected in the near future. I would not disturb the informed decision of the appellate court about the applicants’ residence permit.”

Judge Alito wrote that reversing the federal appeals court’s action means that the Supreme Court must determine that those who oppose Texas law are likely to win the case underlying the blockade.

Judge Alito said it was unclear who could win, and Judges Thomas and Gorsuch agreed with the opposition.

The Texas law was challenged by technology trade groups, the Computer and Communications Industry Association, and NetChoice, asking the Supreme Court to re-implement the blockade over Texas’ objections.

The CCIA on Tuesday welcomed the court’s decision, and the group said it appreciated the high court’s blocking of the law’s enforcement as legal challenges remained.

“This decision means that private American companies will have the opportunity to be heard in court before they are compelled to spread vile, abusive or extremist content under this Texas law,” CCIA president Matt Schruers said in a statement.

The order follows a decision last week by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th, which ruled that a similar Florida law likely violated First Amendment freedom of speech protections.

In some states, elected Republican officials supported legislation similar to those in Florida and Texas, which sought to portray social media companies as generally liberal and hostile to outside ideas, particularly from the political right.

The Texas law was initially blocked by a district judge, but was later allowed to take effect by the panel of the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.