Republican Senators Turn Up Heat on Twitter After Fact-Checks

(Bloomberg) -- After President Donald Trump signed an executive order aimed at striking a blow against social media platforms, several Republican Senators piled on, looking for additional ways to reign in Twitter Inc. and other sites conservatives often accuse of being biased against their views.

On Friday, U.S. Senator Ted Cruz of Texas asked the Justice Department and the Treasury to investigate “possible criminal violations” by Twitter for hosting the accounts of top Iranian government officials. Cruz argues that Twitter accounts held by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and Javad Zarif, the foreign minister, violate U.S. sanctions against Iran.

Cruz aimed his ire directly at Twitter Chief Executive Officer Jack Dorsey. “The irony of this is that at the same time that Twitter, that Jack Dorsey, is publishing worldwide the antisemitic threats of violence from the Ayatollah Khamenei, Jack Dorsey is also trying to censor the president of the United States,” Cruz said in an interview Friday on Fox Business. “He's trying to silence genuine political speech by Americans while facilitating terroristic threats by Iran.”

Republican Senators, including Tom Cotton, Josh Hawley and Marsha Blackburn, have also been eager to strike back at Twitter after what they say is censorship of the president. Calls for action increased late last week after Twitter put a fact-check label on two of Trump's tweets regarding mail-in ballots. An incensed Trump issued an executive order on Thursday that seeks to repeal Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, the law passed by Congress in 1996 that provides protections to online media platforms, shielding them from liability for the content posted on their sites.

The next day, Twitter affixed a warning label to one of Trump's posts about protests in Minneapolis that Twitter said violated its policy against glorifying violence. It was the first time the company has applied that type of warning label to one of the president's tweets and the move ratcheted up tensions further with Trump and his supporters.

Senator Hawley of Missouri fired off a letter to Dorsey, saying that Twitter's decision to “single out the president for disfavor, based on his political speech, is alarming.” He said Twitter's decision to “editorialize” raises questions about why it should continue to receive special status and immunity under Section 230. Hawley asked Dorsey for a response and the “sources on which Twitter relied to decide to editorialize regarding the president's political speech” by June 15.

For Twitter, Republican backlash was inevitable: There's a long history there. Dorsey, and other fellow Silicon Valley executives, were grilled by Congress in hearings in 2018 over election interference and allegations of conservative bias. Cruz first raised alarms about Twitter's decision to allow Iranian government officials to tweet in February, though he significantly escalated the situation Friday with his letter requesting a criminal investigation. Hawley has long been determined to strike a blow to technology companies' protections under Section 230 and Trump's executive order has helped thrust the senator's pet issue into the national spotlight.

While the increased public pressure may be uncomfortable for Twitter, it's unclear what practical repercussions could come as a result. For example, Twitter and other technology companies have long argued that they aren't violating American laws against doing business with Iran simply by allowing Iranians to post on their platforms. The Supreme Leader has been on Twitter since March 2009. A spokesman for Twitter declined to comment on Cruz's letter.

Some legal scholars are also skeptical that Trump's executive order has the power to override a law passed by Congress. The order also pushes the government to stop advertising on social media platforms, a directive that could be challenged by technology companies. The Electronic Frontier Foundation's civil liberties director has argued that similar mandates have been struck down by the courts for violating free speech.

“Republicans are going to make a lot of noise about this, but it's just noise because the First Amendment prevents them from doing what they want to do,” said Nu Wexler, a former associate communications director at Twitter until 2017 and an experienced tech policy executive who also has worked at Facebook Inc. and Google and previously worked in Democratic politics. “It's a legal dead end, because Twitter is a private company and they have the right to enforce their own policies as they see fit.”

Republican lawmakers could try to drag Dorsey in front of Congress again. But unlike Alphabet Inc.'s Google and Facebook, which are both under intense antitrust scrutiny, Twitter is unlikely to face similar pressure, given its comparatively humble $24 billion market capitalization, much smaller user base and narrower scope of business. Some tech observers see the lack of antitrust pressure as an advantage for Twitter, helping give it the courage to take tough stands against the president with less concern about retribution than its peers.

And while Republican senators may seek consequences for Twitter's decision to fact-check the president, there are major ideological disagreements among conservatives about whether the government should be in the business of deciding how technology companies run their platforms. “It's honestly fairly contrary to Republican conservative principles,” said Charles Duan, director of technology and innovation policy at the free market think tank R Street Institute. “The idea that the government should engage in regulation of private companions in order to limit what they are able to do with their free speech rights is pretty remarkable to me.”

But Republican voters are animated by the idea that social media companies are trying to censor their point of view, he said. “As a practical matter I understand what they're going for, it's something that does bring a certain class of the electorate together.”

Duan said the federal government has tried to create its own forms of social networks, including an online petition portal, and has ended up censoring objectionable content aggressively. Meanwhile, conservatives have long opposed legislation like the Fairness Doctrine, that has attempted to force companies to behave with political neutrality. When that legislation was repealed in 1987, it allowed for the proliferation of right-wing talk radio.

Even Ben Shapiro, the conservative podcast host, has expressed skepticism about the effort to repeal Section 230. “The invitation to redefine ‘unfair business practices' to include comment-policing-based lawsuits will likely not end well for conservatives,” Shapiro tweeted Thursday. “I see the appeal, but I'm wondering just why conservatives are suddenly so unconcerned about political bias among regulators.”

The renewed hostility from Republicans could have one silver lining for Twitter -- it could make Democrats more inclined to rally to its defense. “This Executive Order is egregiously excessive with clearly malevolent intent to suppress free speech,” Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut said in a statement. “It is a blatant attempt to use the full power of the United States government to force private companies to lie for him.”