PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 26, 2023
Curbing Abuse and Saving Expression In Technology Act or the CASE-IT Act
This bill limits liability protection, sometimes referred to as Section 230 protection, for a user or provider of an interactive computer service (e.g., social media company) related to content that is published on or removed from its platform.
The bill removes for one year the protection from being treated as the publisher of information provided by another content provider if a user or provider facilitates (1) illegal online content; (2) certain exploitive contact between adults and minors; or (3) content that is indecent, obscene, or otherwise harmful to minors.
Further, to avoid being treated as the publisher of third-party content or subject to liability for screening and blocking content on its platform, an interactive computer service that is dominant in its market (i.e., has gained substantial, sustained market power over any competitors) must make content moderation decisions pursuant to policies or practices that are consistent with the First Amendment.
People & committees
Rep. Steube, W. Gregory [R-FL-17] · R–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Communications and Technology.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jul 24, 2024. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.573 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.573 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.573 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.573 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.