Does federal liability protection turn technology firms into state actors?
Core argument: Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act pre-empts state law and shields tech firms from liability, which the author argues effectively turns those companies into extensions of the state.
Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act has effectively transformed tech firms into extensions of the state by pre-empting state law and shielding these companies from liability, similar to historical precedents like Railway Employees’ Department v. Hanson (1956) and Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives Association (1989). In these cases, private actions were deemed state actions due to federal statutes that immunized them from state-level legal challenges. This legal framework allows tech firms to operate with significant autonomy while being insulated from lawsuits, thereby aligning their operations with federal interests without direct mandates. The economic implications are profound, as this legal protection fosters a business environment where tech giants can dominate markets with reduced accountability, potentially stifling competition and innovation.










Ed Comment:“…I am skeptical. There was a compositional shift away from lower skilled workers that needs to be accounted for. And no one is investing in developing new client relationship so they are sacrificing the future for the present. On the other hand. Necessity is the mother of invention. Lots of people ar doing things like learning how to zoom that they otherwise would have postponed….”
We’ll see about the potential gains from remote work, “..Before the pandemic, about 40% of Americans who didn’t work from home spent at least an hour commuting each day, with 10% spending at least two hours commuting back and forth. The share of Americans who worked from home full time was just 5.7% in 2019, although almost a quarter of American workers were working from home a few hours each day.As of December, about 26% of full-time workers were doing their jobs from home to avoid the virus. Almost 60% of the workers in “business and financial operations occupations,” “computer and mathematical occupations,” “architecture and engineering occupations,” and “legal occupations” were working remotely. If remote work becomes normal, some of those long-distance commuters may choose to stay home permanently, or relocate to a different part of the country where they wouldn’t need to travel so far to access urban amenities. That in turn could encourage some of the blue-collar service workers they indirectly employ to migrate to suburbs and cheaper cities, potentially lifting their real wages….”