Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/23pdf/22-277_d18f.pdf
Page Number: 40

Cite as:  603 U. S. ____ (2024) 

3 

BARRETT, J., concurring 

a particular point of view”?  Hurley, 515 U. S., at 575.  In 
other words, technology may attenuate the connection be-
tween  content-moderation  actions  (e.g.,  removing  posts)
and human beings’ constitutionally protected right to “de-
cide for [themselves] the ideas and beliefs deserving of ex-
pression,  consideration,  and  adherence.”  Turner  Broad-
casting  System,  Inc.  v.  FCC,  512  U. S.  622,  641  (1994) 
(emphasis  added).    So  the  way  platforms  use  this  sort  of
technology might have constitutional significance.

There  can  be  other  complexities  too.  For  example,  the
corporate structure and ownership of some platforms may
be relevant to the constitutional analysis.  A speaker’s right 
to “decide ‘what not to say’ ” is “enjoyed by business corpo-
rations generally.”  Hurley, 515 U. S., at 573–574 (quoting 
Pacific Gas & Elec. Co. v. Public Util. Comm’n of Cal., 475 
U. S.  1,  16  (1986)).  Corporations,  which  are  composed  of
human beings with First Amendment rights, possess First
Amendment rights themselves.  See Citizens United v. Fed-
eral Election Comm’n, 558 U. S. 310, 365 (2010); cf. Burwell 
v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., 573 U. S. 682, 706–707 (2014).
But foreign persons and corporations located abroad do not. 
Agency  for  Int’l  Development  v.  Alliance  for  Open  Society 
Int’l, Inc., 591 U. S. 430, 433–436 (2020).  So a social-media 
platform’s  foreign  ownership  and control  over  its  content-
moderation decisions might affect whether laws overriding 
those decisions trigger First Amendment scrutiny.  What if 
the platform’s corporate leadership abroad makes the policy 
decisions  about  the  viewpoints  and  content  the  platform
will  disseminate?    Would  it  matter  that  the  corporation 
employs  Americans  to  develop  and  implement  content-
moderation algorithms if they do so at the direction of for-
eign  executives?  Courts  may  need  to  confront  such  ques-
tions when applying the First Amendment to certain plat-
forms. 

These  are  just  a  few  examples  of  questions  that  might