January 9, 2025
Mr. Schmitt introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to address governmental interference in content moderation decisions by providers of interactive computer services, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
Section 1. Short title
This Act may be cited as the Curtailing Online Limitations that Lead Unconstitutionally to Democracy's Erosion Act
or the COLLUDE Act
.
Sec. 2. Content moderation, creation and development, and distribution
Section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 230) is amended—
(1)
in subsection (c)—
(A)
in paragraph (1)—
(i)
by striking No provider
and inserting the following:
(A) In general
Subject to subparagraph (B), no provider; and
(ii)
by adding at the end the following:
(B) Affirmative defense
In a criminal or civil action against a provider or user of an interactive computer service that treats the provider or user as the publisher or speaker of any information, the provider or user shall bear the burden of proving that the provider or user is not an information content provider with respect to that information for purposes of subparagraph (A).;
(B)
in paragraph (2)(B), by striking paragraph (1)
and inserting subparagraph (A)
; and
(C)
by adding at the end the following:
(3) Loss of protection in cases of governmental censorship
(A) In general
Except as provided in subparagraph (B), this subsection shall not apply to a provider of an interactive computer service that restricts access to or availability of material—
(i)
in a manner that reasonably appears to express, promote, limit the visibility of, or suppress legitimate political speech, including a discernible viewpoint; and
(ii)
as a result of a communication that—
(I)
is sent to the provider by—
(aa)
a governmental entity; or
(bb)
a non-governmental entity that is acting at the request or behest of a governmental entity; and
(II)
the applicable entity under subclause (I) sends only to the provider and not to any other entity.
(B) Exception
A communication that is for a legitimate law enforcement purpose or a national security purpose shall not be considered to be a communication that is described in subparagraph (A)(ii).; and
(2)
in subsection (f), by adding at the end the following:
(5) Legitimate law enforcement purpose
The term legitimate law enforcement purpose means, with respect to a communication, that the purpose of the communication is so that a law enforcement agency can, within the lawful authority of that agency, investigate a criminal offense.
(6) National security purpose
The term national security purpose means, with respect to a communication, that the purpose of the communication relates to—
(A)
intelligence activities;
(B)
cryptologic activities that relate to the national security of the United States;
(C)
command and control of the Armed Forces;
(D)
equipment that is an integral part of a weapon or a weapons system; or
(E)
the direct fulfillment of a military or intelligence mission.