HR 285 117th Congress House

CASE-IT Act

Official title: To amend section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934 to limit the immunity of providers and users of interactive computer services under such section, and for other purposes.

Introduced: January 21, 2021 Introduced by: Steube, W. Gregory Republican · Florida See on congress.gov

Science, Technology, Communications Administrative law and regulatory proceduresChild safety and welfareCivil actions and liabilityComputers and information technology

More subjectsShow fewer subjects

Crimes against childrenDepartment of JusticeFederal Trade Commission (FTC)First Amendment rightsInternet and video servicesInternet, web applications, social mediaLicensing and registrationsSex offenses

Everywhere this bill has been 3 steps

Introduced

In committee

Reported out

Passed House

Passed Senate

To President

Became law

Feb 2, 2021

Referred to the Subcommittee on Communications and Technology.

Jan 12, 2021

Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.

Jan 12, 2021

Introduced in House

Ask about this bill AI · grounded in the bill text

Have a question about what this bill does? Ask in plain English; the answer is drawn from the bill's actual text and official record, and it'll tell you when something isn't in the text rather than guess.

AI answers can be imperfect; always confirm against the full bill text.

Latest action February 2, 2021

Referred to the Subcommittee on Communications and Technology.

Plain-English summary Congressional Research Service

Curbing Abuse and Saving Expression In Technology Act or the CASE-IT Act

This bill limits the protections for a user or provider of an interactive computer service (e.g., social media company) related to content that is published on or removed from its platform.

The bill removes for one year the protection from being treated as the publisher of information provided by another content provider if a user or provider facilitates (1) illegal online content; (2) certain exploitive contact between adults and minors; or (3) content that is indecent, obscene, or otherwise harmful to minors.

Further, to avoid being treated as the publisher of third-party content or subject to liability for screening and blocking content on its platform, an interactive computer service that is dominant in its market (i.e., has gained substantial, sustained market power over any competitors) must make content moderation decisions pursuant to policies or practices that are consistent with the First Amendment.

Bill text 1 version