“Executives do everything they can to create an environment that is conducive to the actions they want to take, without the need for scrutiny and accountability from entities such as our courts, legislators and others,” he says.
Since taking on X, formerly Twitter, Musk has develop into one among Trump’s most significant allies, financially supporting his campaign and used his entire platform to promote Trump’s talking points in the course of the campaign. Since then, he has attended meetings with foreign leaders with the president-elect and spoken out on the problem personnel decisions for the brand new administration. Other tech leaders have noticed, cozying up to Trump and by contributing to the inaugural fund. However, even before the election, other tech firms followed X’s example by rolling back previously applicable policies and protections.
For his part, David Greene, senior staff attorney on the Electronic Frontier Foundation, says Meta and other social media platforms would likely have to comply with state laws no matter location. And moving staff to Texas doesn’t suggest all of the alleged moderation problems shall be fixed. In his opinion, bias can cut each ways.
“Disinformation is really one of the many, many problems that social media platforms have to deal with,” he says. “Having a moderation team in Texas may also raise concerns about bias. For example, Texas has a state-of-the-art law that prohibits the publication of certain information about the availability of abortion services.”
But Benavidez says Texas’ social media law is probably not the state’s only attraction. “When a company is based or conducts significant operations in a state, it allows it to use that state as jurisdiction for any future filings,” he says.
In 2023, X filed a lawsuit in Texas against the nonprofit Media Matters for America, claiming the group disparaged the corporate by declaring that hate speech and misinformation on the platform accompanied the ads. At that point, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton also announced his office was initiating an investigation into this organization. A federal judge in Texas refused to dismiss the case in August 2024. Since then, X modified the terms of service thus, any lawsuits against the corporate have to be filed in Texas. The feds must be brought to the Northern District of Texas, widely seen as friendly to Musk’s interests. (Apparently, for instance, the judge in the Media Matters case bought and sold shares at Musk’s Tesla earlier this 12 months, before the lawsuit was filed.)
Meta terms of serviceunlike the Community Guidelines, it stays unchanged for now and mandates that disputes be resolved in the Northern District of California or, on the state level, in San Mateo County. But which will change.
“The legislative environment, the judicial environment and the gubernatorial environment in Texas is extremely favorable to executives like Musk and now Zuckerberg,” Benavidez says.
Gill posits that the regulatory environment in Texas may resemble what firms consider the national regulatory environment will appear to be under the brand new Trump administration.
“I think they look to the future and see an environment that will be dominated by an administration that is conservative and in some ways extremist,” he says. “That’s why they’re moving to places where it’s the norm, so they can comply sooner.”
Gill also notes that Meta faces an issue antitrust lawsuit filed by the Federal Trade Commissionwhich the friendly administration saw fit to throw away. “By introducing preventive changes that they hope will appease the administration, they can count on a friendly decision in return,” he says.
Meta didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.
