Graham: ‘I’m more determined than ever’ to strip big tech of section 230 protections

Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) announced on Twitter that he has found new motivation to fight big tech and its Section 230 protections. Graham said he “willingly” accepts his fate of a potential banning but that the removal of Trump’s account was a “serious mistake.”

“The Ayatollah can tweet, but Trump can’t. Says a lot about the people who run Twitter,” Graham tweeted.

One of the most effective solutions to stop the discrimination conservatives are seeing increasingly on big tech is strip Section 230 protections—as recently reported by this author on

Graham agrees with this assessment, tweeting “I’m more determined than ever to strip Section 230 protections from Big Tech (Twitter) that let them be immune from lawsuits.”

Section 230 is a small portion of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 (CDA)—an act passed with the purpose of preventing minors from accessing sexually explicit materials on the Internet. The CDA itself was an addition to the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which sought to expand competitiveness in this groundbreaking internet market. The CDA was added on as an amendment—Title V—months later and thus Section 230 became law. 

It allows big tech companies to remove and block content it deems to be “obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected.” The law’s only boundaries are that removal of speech be done in “good faith.”

Intended to allow internet companies to block harmful content and to avoid consequences for content put out by their users, this section has since been hijacked to pave the consequence-free way for big tech to shadow-ban, silence, and squash conservative thought. 

You can follow Ben Wilson on Twitter @BenDavisWilson