The Excerpt podcast: Supreme Court skeptical of laws to regulate social media companies

On Tuesday's episode of The Excerpt podcast: The Supreme Court appeared skeptical Monday of controversial laws to regulate social media companies. USA TODAY Supreme Court Correspondent Maureen Groppe reports. In international news, the Palestinian prime minister and Cabinet have resigned which could make way for a technocratic government to run post-war Gaza. Meanwhile President Biden says a Gaza ceasefire could come by 'end of the weekend.' And Hungary's Parliament voted yesterday to ratify Sweden's bid to join NATO. USA TODAY Money and Personal Finance Reporter Medora Lee looks at several Congressional fights that could affect your wallet. A New York City journalist's death is the city's latest lithium-ion battery fire fatality.

Hit play on the player below to hear the podcast and follow along with the transcript beneath it.  This transcript was automatically generated, and then edited for clarity in its current form. There may be some differences between the audio and the text.

Podcasts:  True crime, in-depth interviews and more USA TODAY podcasts right here

Taylor Wilson:

Good morning. I'm Taylor Wilson, and today is Tuesday, February 27th, 2024. This is The Excerpt. Today, a peek at the Supreme Court's view in a case that could have major implications for social media, plus what a Palestinian resignation might mean for the future of Gaza, and how several debates in Congress could affect your wallet.

♦

The Supreme Court heard arguments yesterday in one of the most closely watched cases of the year, one that could change the way millions of Americans interact with social media during an election year. I spoke with USA Today Supreme Court Correspondent Maureen Groppe to learn more. Maureen, thanks for making some time today.

Maureen Groppe:

Happy to do it.

Taylor Wilson:

So let's get to what's at issue in this social media, free speech battle around these Texas and Florida laws. What do the states argue here and what are the trade groups representing the social media companies argue?

Maureen Groppe:

Texas and Florida passed laws in 2021 because they thought that social media companies have been too quick to throttle conservative viewpoints. So their laws limit the ability of the social media giants like Facebook and YouTube and X to moderate their content. The trade groups representing the social media companies say that these laws would infringe on their First Amendment rights of free speech. And they back this up by pointing to a 1974 decision from the Supreme Court about a Florida law, which the court struck down saying Florida could not require a newspaper to publish replies to editorials.

And the social media companies say that on their sites, they're making editorial judgments when they curate their sites similar to the kinds that newspapers make. But Florida and Texas say that Facebook, for example, is not like a newspaper. They say it's more like a telephone or a telegraph, which is transmitting content generated by the customers. And since everyone today communicates online, that's a public square that has to be available to everyone.

Taylor Wilson:

So Maureen, what did we hear during yesterday's arguments and do we have any sense how the Justices are thinking about these laws?

Maureen Groppe:

We heard a lot of questions from the Justices about how exactly these laws would be applied, and there weren't always answers. For example, at one point, Justice Alito asked for a list of all the sites covered by Florida's law and the State Solicitor General said he didn't have one. He blamed the social media sites for being what he called fairly cagey about which of their members they thought the statute would apply to. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, she asked if Florida's law would apply to a virtual job fair hosted by LinkedIn? And the state's attorney said he didn't know.

So you got the sense that the Justices were struggling to figure out all the implications, and they seemed to think that some part of the state's laws might be okay, others not, but they didn't feel like they had enough information necessarily to make broad determinations.

Taylor Wilson:

And really, what might the broader implications end up being here?

Maureen Groppe:

Well, one expert, the Executive Director of the Knight First Amendment Institute, he told us that these cases could completely reshape the digital public sphere. The social media companies were asked how they would respond if the laws are allowed to go into effect, and the lawyer representing them said the companies would have to fundamentally change their business models.

Taylor Wilson:

And coming up, what are some of the other social media cases before the court in the next few months?

Maureen Groppe:

Well, next month the Justices are going to hear arguments about whether officials at the White House and federal agencies violated the First Amendment when they leaned on social media companies to suppress what they considered misinformation about the election and the COVID-19 pandemic. And the Justices are also considering whether public officials may block individual users from following their personal social media accounts.

Taylor Wilson:

All right, Maureen Groppe covers the Supreme Court for USA Today. Thank you as always, Maureen.

Maureen Groppe:

Thank you.

♦

Taylor Wilson:

This morning, we're bringing you several major international developments from yesterday. First, Palestinian Prime Minister Mohammed Shtayyeh, and his government resigned. The move could signal a willingness to back US-supported reforms seen as necessary for revitalizing the governing body to have a role in Gaza when the war with Israel ends. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas later accepted the resignation. The development comes as talks resumed in Qatar over the weekend, aimed at a potential weeks-long ceasefire between Israel and Hamas. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has appeared to confirm that a deal is in the works, though has provided no details. President Joe Biden said he hopes for a ceasefire in a matter of days.

Joe Biden:

My National Security Advisor tells me that we're close, we're close. It's not done yet, and my hope is by next Monday we'll have a ceasefire.

Taylor Wilson:

Elsewhere in the world, Hungary's Parliament voted yesterday to ratify Sweden's bid to join NATO. The move ends months of delays and diplomatic wrangling after the country's security policy shift in response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine. The vote was the last major hurdle to Sweden joining the military alliance. Historically neutral Sweden applied to join NATO at the same time as Finland back in May of 2022. Finland became a member in April of last year, while Sweden's application was held up by Turkey and Hungary. Turkey had expressed reservations over Sweden's support for Kurdish separatist groups and restrictions on arms exports to Turkey. Hungary's right-wing nationalist Prime Minister Viktor Orban had said that criticism of Hungary's democracy by Swedish politicians had soured relations between the two countries. You can read more with a link in today's show notes.

♦

Well, stop us if you've heard this one before. Congress has until the end of the work week to reach a spending agreement or the nation will face a partial government shutdown. And as lawmakers continue to squabble over budgets and bills, Americans may want to pay attention to three issues in particular that could affect their wallets. I spoke with USA Today Money and Personal Finance Reporter Medora Lee for more. Medora, thanks for hopping on The Excerpt today.

Medora Lee:

Thanks for having me.

Taylor Wilson:

So Medora, you wrote about three Congressional negotiations that could really affect folks' finances. Let's start with the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children. This is also known as WIC. What's Congress considering here?

Medora Lee:

Yeah, so the WIC program provides nutrition assistance to a lot of women and children all through the year. It's really important, like 6,700,000 women and children. But participation's rising as everybody's being bitten by inflation still and uncertainty in the economy and layoffs, and so there are more people signing up for it. And to serve them, the USDA says WIC needs another billion dollars. Now, they've asked for this money since budget talks began last year, but they haven't gotten it yet. And so now Congress is facing another budget showdown here because the last stopgap measure is expiring next month.

And so they've got to start making their appropriations. So the USDA is worried because they have not gotten any guarantee for this extra money that they need. And so without it, starting next month, states may have to start waitlisting people, turning people away or cut their benefits for the first time in 30 years.

Taylor Wilson:

Wow. And so shifting to the low Income Home Energy Assistance program, what is this, Medora and what's the latest from Capitol Hill on potential additional funding?

Medora Lee:

This one looks maybe even more difficult. They also need some extra funding. Doesn't everybody? So this program, they get a base of $4.1 billion and I think that that's been appropriated already in the budget, but they also got last year an extra $2 billion because they had so many people who needed help with their energy bills, heating and cooling assistance. They helped a record 7,100,000 households last year. So this year, they're asking again for that extra $2 billion that they had received last year. And so far, the sources are saying that it doesn't look good. They're saying that it looks like there's not going to be any extra money given to them. So if they don't get that extra $2 billion this year, they estimate that over a million people will have to be cut from the program. And so could end up being a really hot summer for some people.

Taylor Wilson:

Yeah, absolutely. So the House also last month passed a bill that would allow a larger portion of the Child Tax Credit to be refundable. Do we expect this to move successfully through the Senate and what could it mean for some Americans' finances?

Medora Lee:

So this one is not tied to the budget, but it's important nevertheless. It's stuck now. The House passed its bill, it's stuck in the Senate and it still has to go to the Finance Committee to review, debate and possibly rewrite before it even goes to the Senate floor. And it's just been stalled. There hasn't been a lot of talk about it. Some people are talking about rewriting it because it seems too much like welfare. Other people say it's too expensive, and so we'll have to see where that goes.

But basically, by increasing the credit now is $2,000. And right now the refundable portion is at $1,600. They want to increase it to $1,800 for 2023 and then to $1,900 in 2024 and $2,000 in 2025. The $2,000 credit will be adjusted for inflation in 2024 and 2025. So the Senate still has to vote on it and we'll see where that goes. But it could be really meaningful for people because it's not as big as the Child Tax Credit expansion under the American Rescue Plan where people got their checks in advance, but it could still be meaningful. I think that there were estimates that in the first year alone, 400,000 children would be lifted out of poverty. So we'll see where that goes.

The enhanced Child Tax Credit would be retroactive to tax year 2023, which is what Americans have started filing already. If it does pass, the IRS says it is ready to recalculate people's taxes if they've already filed. And if they're entitled to more refund, they will send that check out just like they did with the American Rescue Plan when they had retroactive tax issues. But the IRS says, "Do not hesitate to file your taxes as early as possible."

Taylor Wilson:

All right. Medora Lee covers money and personal finance for USA Today. Thank you, Medora.

Medora Lee:

Thanks for having me.

♦

Taylor Wilson:

The death of a New York City journalist came in what authorities say was the city's latest fire sparked by a micromobility devices lithium-ion battery. Fazil Khan, and India national and data journalist was the lone fatality in an apartment fire on Friday that injured 17 others. He was 27 years old. Earlier this month, Fire Commissioner Laura Kavanagh announced that lithium-ion batteries have recently become a leading cause of fires and fire deaths in New York City and that the problem is growing nationwide. Videos posted by New York's Fire Department show lithium-ion batteries in apartment lobbies, on streets and other public places erupting quickly and then fueling rapidly spreading fires. Heat and explosion from the batteries can cause the fires that are then difficult to extinguish with water or traditional fire extinguishers. Many electric bikes and scooters sold in the US in recent years may contain batteries that have not been approved by consumer safety labs. And fire officials warn that more laws and regulations on e-bike batteries are needed in the US.

♦

Thanks for listening to The Excerpt. You can get the podcast wherever you get your audio, and if you're on a smart speaker, just ask for The Excerpt. I'm Taylor Wilson, back tomorrow with more of The Excerpt from USA Today.

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: The Excerpt podcast: SCOTUS skeptical of laws regulating social media