NICEVILLE — A new bill introduced by Rep. Jimmy Patronis would eliminate one of the most important laws governing how Americans communicate online — a move supporters say would rein in powerful tech companies. Critics warn that it could fundamentally change how the internet works for everyday users.
The legislation, called the Promoting Responsible Online Technology and Ensuring Consumer Trust Act, or PROTECT Act, would fully repeal Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, a 1996 law that shields online platforms from liability for most user-posted content.
Patronis says repealing the law is necessary to protect children from online harm, including exposure to content that promotes self-harm, suicide and addiction.
“As a father of two young boys, I refuse to stand by while Big Tech poisons our kids without consequence,” Patronis said in a statement announcing the bill. He compared social media platforms to addictive substances and argued they profit while avoiding accountability.
Section 230 is the reason websites are generally not legally responsible for what users post, whether that’s a Facebook comment, a YouTube video, a product review, or a message on a forum.
It also allows platforms to remove or moderate content they consider harmful or offensive without becoming legally liable for everything else on their site.
In short, it lets people speak online without forcing platforms to pre-approve every post.
If Section 230 were repealed, posting online would not suddenly become illegal. But legal experts say platforms would likely change their behavior quickly to reduce the risk of lawsuits.
That could mean:
Smaller websites, local news outlets, and nonprofits that lack large legal teams could be hit especially hard.
Section 230 does not protect illegal content, prevent criminal prosecution, or stop individuals from being sued for defamation. Those legal tools already exist.
Repealing the law would also not override the First Amendment, which limits government censorship, not lawsuits between private parties.
Some legal experts say repeal could give platforms more power to remove speech, not less, because companies would assert their own rights as publishers and move quickly to restrict risky content.
Congress has debated changing Section 230 for years. Some lawmakers have proposed narrowing the law or conditioning its protections, while others, like Patronis, support full repeal.
Similar efforts have stalled in the past amid concerns about unintended consequences.
The PROTECT Act does not include replacement rules, transition periods or child-specific regulatory standards. It would take effect immediately if passed.
Financial disclosure reports show that Patronis owns stock in several major technology companies, including Apple, Meta, Amazon, Microsoft, Google, and Oracle, whose operations could be affected by changes to Section 230.
Members of Congress are allowed to hold such investments but must disclose them under federal ethics laws.
The bill has been referred to a committee. No hearing has been scheduled, and its prospects remain uncertain.
Pro Communi Bono
St. Francis De Sales, Ora Pro Nobis!
Register or login with Mid Bay News and never get another pop up on our site!
