Thread by @b_fung

NEW: The White House did not consult the FCC on a forthcoming executive order pertaining to social media companies, according to a person briefed on the matter.

This suggests the draft order has not gone through the normal interagency review process.

The person briefed added that based on the lack of interagency review, it seems the draft EO was hastily conceived.

Worth remembering that with prior WH attempts to draft an executive order targeting social media companies, the FCC and FTC (which are led by Republican chairmen) privately pushed back on being deputized to police political speech on social platforms: cnn.com/2019/08/22/tec…

Also worth remembering that as a general practice, the FCC has repeatedly gone out of its way to avoid regulating websites and internet companies.

The FCC’s GOP leadership made it a point to avoid “regulating the internet” when it rolled back its own net neutrality rules.

We’ve gotten copies of the draft order.

Looking at the text, the main provisions look fairly similar to what we reported previously here: cnn.com/2019/08/09/tec…

The draft EO seeks to curtail the power of tech platforms by reinterpreting Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, a critical law that shields websites and tech companies from lawsuits.

It would (indirectly, via Commerce) have the FCC create regulations outlining how and when companies might expose themselves to litigation under Section 230.

The order also tries to tell the FTC to develop a report on complaints of political bias collected by the White House, and instructs the agency to “consider” bringing lawsuits against companies accused of running afoul of 230.

It would tell DOJ to work with state AGs to determine what state laws could be brought to bear against complaints of political bias.

And it would ban federal agencies from advertising on platforms deemed to have run afoul of Section 230.

Much of the order could quickly get bogged down in a thicket of legal and constitutional questions.

Just for example, the FTC reports to Congress, not the WH.

And importantly, authors of Section 230 such as @RonWyden have repeatedly said that the intent of the law was to ensure tech companies could *not* be sued into oblivion.

For the WH to leverage 230 into obtaining the opposite outcome would be to undermine the purpose of the law.

Can he do that? The legal limits of Trump’s executive order on social media: cnn.com/2020/05/28/pol…

NEW: President Trump has signed an executive order aimed at curtailing the power of social media platforms — an effort legal experts say is fraught with constitutionality questions.

Just got off the phone with @RonWyden, the architect of Section 230.

“[Trump] is trying to steal for himself the power of the courts and Congress to rewrite decades of settled law,” Wyden told me. “He decides what’s legal based on what’s in his interest."

Curtailing protections for websites large and small, he said, will be “a gift to bullies, and will lead to pain and less influence for the little guy with the good idea."

I pointed out some of his Democratic colleagues are keen to make changes to 230. Wyden acknowledged the EARN IT Act, which would make 230 protections conditional on guidelines by a new panel led by DOJ and DHS.

“This is obviously something I will fight with everything I have."

The FCC says it will “carefully review” any ask from the Trump administration for new rules.

“This debate is an important one,” said @AjitPaiFCC in a statement.

It’s hard to know what to think about this. On the one hand, the FCC always “carefully reviews” every little thing, so it’s noncommittal. On the other hand, the fact Pai is talking approvingly of a “debate,” before any EO text is final, hints he’s more than open to the idea.

And here’s the text of the final EO: whitehouse.gov/presidential-a…