Wyden Still Opposed to Earn It Act; No Hold for Now
Sen. Ron Wyden remains opposed to the Earn It Act because it threatens free speech and security, his spokesperson told us Tuesday when asked if the Oregon Democrat plans to place a hold on the bill (see 2007070060). The spokesperson emailed that the bill won’t do anything to “stop the monsters who produce and spread” child sexual abuse material (CSAM) and “threatens the security and free speech of every American.” Wyden’s Invest in Child Safety Act (S-3629) (see 2007010072) would “provide resources to help protect children from becoming victims and to catch the predators responsible,” his office said.
Opposition is wide-ranging, with a list that includes the American Civil Liberties Union, Free Press, the Cato Institute, Americans for Prosperity and various industry trade groups. The Senate Judiciary Committee didn’t provide a list of supporters Wednesday. Given “substantial changes” made to the bill in the manager’s amendment at the markup, the committee doesn’t “have a finalized list of supporters at this time,” emailed a spokesperson for Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. The original announcement listed three of some 70 supporters, all victim advocates.
The bill would remove certain protections for the tech industry under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. President Donald Trump recently targeted Section 230 with an executive order, written in response to Twitter’s censoring and labeling of his tweets (see 2006160059).
The FTC hasn’t received a complaint triggering review of Section 230 that Trump contemplated in the EO, Commissioner Noah Phillips told the Federalist Society Wednesday. We asked the commissioner if the agency has taken any steps to respond to the order, or if he anticipates a request for comment or workshop on the topic. “We’re not quite there yet,” Phillips said. “I haven’t refreshed lately, but my understanding is the order anticipates complaints being sent for the agency to consider, and I’m not aware that that has happened yet. So there isn’t anything triggering that.”
The EO directs the FTC to consider “whether complaints allege violations of law that implicate” specific policies set forth in section 4(a) of the order. That section describes platforms like Twitter and Facebook as the “critical means of promoting the free flow of speech and ideas,” which “should not restrict protected speech.” The order directs the FTC to consider “developing a report describing such complaints and making the report publicly available, consistent with applicable law.”
An FTC spokesperson cited a previous comment: “The FTC is committed to robust enforcement of consumer protection and competition laws, including with respect to social media platforms, and consistent with our jurisdictional authority and constitutional limitations.”