Online Speech and Section 230 After Dobbs
When the Supreme Court handed down its opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women\u2019s Health Organization, overturning Roe v. Wade, the impact of the decision on the internet may not have been front of mind for most people thinking through the implications. But in the weeks after the Court\u2019s decision, it\u2019s become clear that the post-Dobbs legal landscape around abortion implicates many questions around not only data and digital privacy, but also online speech. One piece of model state legislation, for example, would criminalize \u201chosting or maintaining a website, or providing internet service, that encourages or facilitates efforts to obtain an illegal abortion.\u201d
This week on Arbiters of Truth, our series on the online information ecosystem, Evelyn Douek and Quinta Jurecic spoke with Evan Greer, the director of the digital rights organization Fight for the Future. She recently wrote an article in Wired with Lia Holland arguing that \u201cSection 230 is a Last Line of Defense for Abortion Speech Online.\u201d They talked about what role Section 230\u2019s protections have to play when it comes to liability for speech about abortion and what content moderation looks like in a post-Dobbs world.
Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.