Ashley Johnson

Despite legislative requirements, many federal government websites are not accessible for people with disabilities. This creates obstacles for millions of Americans, especially as the COVID-19 pandemic has moved many government services online.

Baltimore is now considering the nation’s most restrictive ban on facial recognition technology.

The IRS’ poor performance exemplifies the difficulty Americans with disabilities can face when trying to execute important and necessary tasks like paying their taxes, as well as the failure of many federal government agencies to provide equal access for all citizens.

Multiple states have introduced legislation to regulate drone operation by handing more power over to local authorities and imposing new rules and fees on drone usage.

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act has quickly transformed from an obscure law known mostly to tech policy experts to a regular feature in public debates and policy discussions. What is this brief, 25-year-old law making headlines, and how could reforming or repealing it impact our daily lives?

AI promises to help cities save money, address infrastructure needs, and reduce emissions. But to unlock these benefits and help smart cities reach their full potential, the federal government has an important role to play in funding RD&D and facilitating cooperation.

As the United States debates potential reforms to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, it is important to understand and evaluate the alternative approaches that other countries have taken to intermediary liability.

In the wide-ranging debate over Section 230, there have been calls to keep the law as it is, repeal it entirely, or reform it. The best approach would be for Congress to pass targeted reforms that address specific harms without unduly burdening online services.

In the ongoing debate over whether and how to amend Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, it is important to understand the law’s origins, meaning, and impact—because, for better or worse, it has shaped the modern Internet.

Courts have generally interpreted Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act broadly, but they have identified some limits for when the law does not provide immunity from liability.

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act has become a key battleground in the larger debate over free speech and content moderation. There are legitimate and illegitimate critiques about it—but they don’t negate the law’s many benefits.

Banning targeted advertising, repealing Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, and imposing common carriage rules on big tech firms all would do nothing to resolve the tensions over online political speech, but they would be disastrous for consumers and business of all sizes.