Trump's social media executive order could force social media to censor Trump
![Trump in the Oval Office](https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/E2VUGTTw4eWMSXtxJDDVZ9-415-80.jpg)
There are a lot of legal, ethical, political, and constitutional questions about the executive order President Trump signed Thursday purporting to "defend free speech" by regulating social media companies. But there's also a practical one: Is Trump shooting himself in the foot?
Trump's executive order targets Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act, a foundational internet law that shields websites like social media companies from liability for most things users post to their sites. If Trump is successful, Twitter, Google, and Facebook "could face legal jeopardy if they allowed false and defamatory posts," Peter Baker and Daisuke Wakabayashi explain at The New York Times. "Without a liability shield, they presumably would have to be more aggressive about policing messages that press the boundaries — like the president's."
"Ironically, Donald Trump is a big beneficiary of Section 230," said Kate Ruane at the American Civil Liberties Union. "If platforms were not immune under the law, then they would not risk the legal liability that could come with hosting Donald Trump's lies, defamation, and threats."
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
![https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/flexiimages/jacafc5zvs1692883516.jpg](https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/flexiimages/jacafc5zvs1692883516-320-80.jpg)
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
Giving Twitter a legal imperative to, say, remove posts in which Trump falsely accuses a prominent critic of murder isn't Trump's desired outcome, Baker and Wakabayashi note. "What he wants is the freedom to post anything he likes without the companies applying any judgment to his messages, as Twitter did this week when it began appending 'get the facts' warnings to some of his false posts on voter fraud." But as with the Communications Decency Act, Trump can't unilaterally nullify the law of unintended consequences.
Perhaps luckily for Trump, his executive order probably has no legal teeth and, if challenged in court, will almost certainly be struck down. "Donald Trump's order is plainly illegal," said Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), one of the 1996 law's authors. You can learn more about Section 230, including why it has critics on the left and right — for different reasons — in this Washington Post explainer.
Trump's effort to quashing Section 230 by executive fiat immediately "touched off widespread opposition, uniting Democratic lawmakers, digital experts, longtime conservative-leaning advocacy groups, and a bevy of free speech activists," the Post reports.
"Social media can be frustrating," said Jessica Rosenworcel, a Democratic member of the Federal Communications Commission, one of the independent agencies Trump directed to act. "But an executive order that would turn the Federal Communications Commission into the president's speech police is not the answer."
Create an account with the same email registered to your subscription to unlock access.
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Peter has worked as a news and culture writer and editor at The Week since the site's launch in 2008. He covers politics, world affairs, religion and cultural currents. His journalism career began as a copy editor at a financial newswire and has included editorial positions at The New York Times Magazine, Facts on File, and Oregon State University.
-
Video game performers to strike over AI concerns
Speed Read SAG-AFTRA members are unhappy with gaming production companies
By Rafi Schwartz, The Week US Published
-
Today's political cartoons - July 26, 2024
Cartoons Friday's cartoons - campaign donations, yellow buses, and more
By The Week US Published
-
California orders mass dismantling of unhoused people's camps
Speed Read Gavin Newsom's move follows a Supreme Court ruling last month in favor of an Oregon city that ticketed people for sleeping outside
By Rafi Schwartz, The Week US Published
-
Empty-nest boomers aren't selling their big homes
Speed Read Most Americans 60 and older do not intend to move, according to a recent survey
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published
-
Brazil accuses Musk of 'disinformation campaign'
Speed Read A Brazilian Supreme Court judge has opened an inquiry into Elon Musk and X
By Rafi Schwartz, The Week US Published
-
Disney board fends off Peltz infiltration bid
Speed Read Disney CEO Bob Iger has defeated activist investor Nelson Peltz in a contentious proxy battle
By Rafi Schwartz, The Week US Published
-
Disney and DeSantis reach detente
Speed Read The Florida governor and Disney settle a yearslong litigation over control of the tourism district
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published
-
Visa and Mastercard agree to lower swipe fees
Speed Read The companies will cap the fees they charge businesses when customers use their credit cards
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published
-
Reddit IPO values social media site at $6.4 billion
Speed Read The company makes its public debut on the New York Stock Exchange
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published
-
Housing costs: the root of US economic malaise?
speed read Many voters are troubled by the housing affordability crisis
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published
-
Feds cap credit card late fees at $8
speed read The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau finalized a rule to save households an estimated $10 billion a year
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published