To face a reckoning before the Supreme Court this term? The court has decided to put itself in the middle of the debate over whether some of the world's most powerful tech companies should be protected as neutral forums for speech or held accountable for the content. The cases are the first test before the court of the broad immunity social media companies have under section two 30 part of the 1996 communications decency act. It's become a target of conservatives, including former president Trump, who say it lets left leaning tech companies censor right wing voices. I've been talking to professor Eric Goldman of Santa Clara university law school and co director of the high-tech law institute. Is it happenstance that both these involve terrorist attacks on foreign soil? No, I don't think it's happenstance because many of the cases that have been brought in this genre. There are about 20 of them that have been filed across the country have involved foreign terrorist activity. Some of them have involved domestic activity, ultimately I don't think that it really matters from a legal standpoint. There's so many legal reasons why the services should be liable regardless of where the terrorist activity took place. So these cases are the first chest of section two 30 at the Supreme Court. What does it tell you that the Supreme Court agreed to hear them when and like so many other cases, this term, it didn't have to, meaning there was no circuit split that it had to resolve. Yeah. So one of the most common ways that Supreme