The dichotomy between blue and red states – in essence California vs. Florida and Texas – has played out in many arenas on many specific issues, including immigration and abortion.
The whole nation will get a full dose of the running conflict next month when California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat who’s obsessed with building a national image, debates Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, a declared 2024 Republican candidate for president, on national television.
Meanwhile, an ironic twist to the rivalry has developed over how the competing states seek to force social media companies, such as X (formerly Twitter) and Facebook, to toe the official line on content that runs afoul of their very different ideological outlooks.
When it reconvened this month, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to examine laws in Florida and Texas that would prohibit social media outlets from barring controversial political speech. The laws were enacted after both Facebook and Twitter suspended former President Donald Trump’s account.
The Texas law, now on hold, would classify social media companies as common carriers such as public utilities and require them to disclose their “moderation standards” affecting what they allow to be posted, and declare why they remove certain conduct.
The Florida law – similar in thrust – would prohibit banning certain users, such as journalists or politicians, and require social media companies to explain the rationale for each instance of content moderation.
In both cases, the social media companies say Florida and Texas are attempting to control how they edit their platforms in violation of the Constitution’s right to freedom of speech.
Learn more about legislators mentioned in this story
Jesse Gabriel
State Assembly, District 46 (Woodland Hills)
State Assembly, District 46 (Woodland Hills)
“At bottom, government ‘may not … tell Twitter or YouTube what videos to post; or tell Facebook or Google what content to favor,’” Scott Keller, an attorney for internet trade groups, told the court in a petition.
The issues before the Supreme Court are remarkably similar to a lawsuit filed in federal court this month by X Corp. against California, alleging that a 2022 law violates its free speech right as well.
The law, Assembly Bill 587, also bores into the standards that social media use to moderate content, requiring them to make extensive disclosures to the state Department of Justice. The measure was sponsored by the Anti-Defamation League and is aimed at pressuring the social media companies to remove what the sponsor deems to be hate speech.
“The line between providing an open forum for productive discourse and permitting the proliferation of hate speech and misinformation is a fine one, and depends largely on the structure and practices of the platform,” Assemblyman Jesse Gabriel, a Woodland Hills Democrat, said in a statement as his bill was being considered.
X Corp. claims that Gabriel’s law violates the First Amendment because it interferes with social media companies’ constitutionally protected editorial judgements, requires them to post terms “dictated by the government,” and pressures them to remove content the state “deems undesirable or harmful.”
Fundamentally, then, while Texas and Florida accuse social media of being too eager to censor inflammatory content, the California law implies that they are not eager enough.
California, meanwhile, has rolled back another censorship law passed last year.
Assembly Bill 2098 threatened doctors with losing their licenses for “unprofessional conduct” if they openly disagreed with officialdom on the nature of COVID-19 or the vaccines used to battle the pandemic.
This year, a few words that repealed the law were slipped into an omnibus medical licensing measure, Senate Bill 815, that Newsom quietly signed. The repeal short-circuited what could have been another legal battle over censorship and the First Amendment and is a lesson about legislating without considering effects on constitutional rights.
- Mountain Lion F29 to Be Relocated Again — Residents Question Whether It Will StickPost Views: 5 Mountain Lion F29 Under Active Capture Operation Near Mount Shasta MOUNT SHASTA, CA — The Siskiyou County Sheriff’s Office and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife announced Tuesday that F29, the juvenile female mountain lion that has been preying on pets and small livestock in the Weed and Mount Shasta areas,
- Fake Virus Alerts, Phishing, and Online Scams: How to Protect Yourself From Today’s Most Common Digital ThreatsPost Views: 48 A Message from Digital Expert My name is Sohaib Ur Rehman, and I work with Siskiyou News in digital publishing and online media. Over the years, I have seen countless examples of misleading online advertisements, phishing attempts, fake virus warnings, and other internet scams designed to trick users into sharing personal information
- Election Summary Report #2 – June 02,2026 General Election Siskiyou County CAPost Views: 611 Election Summary Report Siskiyou County Primary Election Results: Local Races Decided, State Contests Set for November By Siskiyou NewsJune 3, 2026 Siskiyou County voters cast ballots in the June 2, 2026 Statewide Primary Election, with all 56 precincts now reporting. Turnout reached 29.18%, with 8,054 voters participating out of 27,600 registered. Several
- Sisq Writers’ Club: Poem – “Working Man”Post Views: 55 Working Man You work all day for a dollar, and you get nothing but pain. And you would like to quit, but the dollars that you get lets you live without shame. You drag out of bed in the morning still tiered from the day before. But your boss doesn’t care about
- Sisq Writers’ Club: Poem – “Blind Musician”Post Views: 26 Blind Musician He sits on the street corner not seeing a thing. He just plays music on his guitar and sings. He’s a part of the corner just like the street sign. But people only know him as the man that is blind. For the sound of a plink in his bowl.
