The Supreme Court is hearing two cases that can change the use of social media and set precedents for interpreting the First Amendment.

Conservative states Texas and Florida have passed laws prohibiting social media companies from banning political figures on their platforms.  

While Texas and Florida argue that social media is a host for communication similar to speech on a telephone, social media companies state that the First Amendment guarantee of free speech only applies to censorship by the government, but not private businesses. The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Feb. 26 in two cases, NetChoice v. Paxton on Texas’ law and Moody v.  NetChoice on Florida’s law. NetChoice is an association representing social media companies and handles litigation.  

The two state’s laws also allow individuals to sue tech companies for alleged discrimination. Officials from both states claim that companies silence conservative content.  However, social media companies state that users agree to terms that allow them to edit and arrange content. Doing so also serves as a safety mechanism for mitigating threats and terrorist recruitment.  

On April 1, the Supreme Court also heard cases on the government’s ability to ask social media companies to censor content. Since both cases relate to social media and interpretations of the First Amendment, they can easily be confused. The common use of social media among adolescents stresses the importance of thorough education and critical thinking on current issues.

Regardless of the court’s decision, social media has been influential in affecting classroom dynamics.  

While students need to be educated on current events such as these, neutrality should be maintained in a classroom, Michael Bryant, a business law professor at SUNY Oswego, found.  Bryant is a lawyer specializing in bankruptcy and has been teaching for three years. As an instructor, he hopes to foster practical skills regardless of a student’s pre-existing skill sets and interest in the material.  

“You might not think you’re going to use anything in the classroom, but I’ll bet there’s some gems in there you can pick up,” Bryant said. “You can take it with you and say ‘I know about that.’”

Meanwhile, SUNY Oswego journalism professor Catherine Loper discussed the evolution of student interest and involvement in politics and current events. During her college education, recognizing reliability was easier since there were fewer news sources.  

“When I first started teaching, often students would say that they only got the news when their parents had it on,” Loper said. “Now a lot of students tell me they only get news when their grandparents have it on.”  

Despite having more sources and subspecialties to misinformation, students have become less vocal in classroom discussions on current events than when she started teaching. Similarly,  Loper teaches the importance of neutrality in publication, as journalism ethics standards stress the accuracy of information.  

From her time working at Fox News, Loper has observed the consequences of reporters letting opinions out. With the internet and social media, it is easy to voice opinions regardless of merit. However, Loper teaches students that journalists are held to a different standard.  

“You don’t realize that something that you think everyone believes might be offensive to others,” Loper said. “It’s a new concept for some people.”  

For high school and middle school contexts, teachers must remain open-minded and form trusting relationships with students to encourage informed discussion based on credible sources,  history education student Amanda Demmerle said.  

“You want them to share with you, you want them to be like, this is a person I trust, this is someone who’s going to impact my life in the future,” Demmerle said. 

According to Demmerle, debate in social studies can positively foster historical thinking.  Examining historical documents offers multiple perspectives on events. For example, documents on the Boston Massacre provide perspectives from both British soldiers and colonists.

 “You want to make sure that you are stating some facts because you want students to make up their own minds,” Demmerle said. “In my classroom, my goal is to be neutral.” 

Dememerle is pursuing a PhD in history and wants to do research focusing on historical thinking in education. The study area seeks insight into student engagement with complex thinking rather than memorization. She is working alongside the SUNY Cortland history faculty and hopes to get published next semester. Her current courses offer perspectives on how to address current issues, such as the Supreme Court’s social media hearings in a classroom setting. 

The verdicts on the two cases are still pending but the ruling will set a new precedent for the definition of free speech in an increasingly digital society. Ways in which students can acquire and interpret information through primary exposure sources like social media will impact how educators must adjust to ensure the preparedness of the next generation of voters.

Photo by: Kerde Severin via Pexels