PROTECT Act
- Bill Number
- H.R. 7045
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 2
- Policy Area
- Science, Technology, Communications
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2026-01-13: Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
- Last Updated
- 2026-02-21T09:05:26Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose of the Legislation
The PROTECT Act (H.R. 7045) aims to repeal Section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934, a law that currently shields online platforms from legal responsibility for user-generated content. By removing this protection, the bill seeks to hold online services more accountable for the content they host or moderate, promoting what the bill describes as "responsible online technology" and "consumer trust."
Key Provisions
- Repeal of Section 230: The core action is the complete removal of Section 230 (47 U.S.C. 230), which previously granted immunity to websites and apps for third-party content and allowed them to moderate content without being treated as publishers.
- Conforming Amendments: The bill updates multiple federal laws to eliminate references to Section 230 and adjust related definitions:
- Redefines "interactive computer service" in the Communications Act (Section 223) to broadly include any service providing multi-user access to computer servers, such as internet providers or systems run by libraries and schools.
- Removes Section 230 exemptions or cross-references in laws covering trademarks, copyrights (Title 17), criminal offenses (Title 18, e.g., obscenity and child exploitation), controlled substances, alcohol regulation (Webb-Kenyon Act), judicial procedures (Title 28), judicial privacy (Daniel Anderl Act), financial regulations (Title 31), and telecommunications organization (NTIA Act).
- Strikes specific defenses tied to Section 230, such as protections against liability for content moderation in child protection and drug laws.
- Effective Date: All changes take effect immediately upon the bill's enactment into law.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- End of Immunity Shield: Platforms like social media sites, search engines, and forums will no longer be protected from lawsuits over user-posted content, such as defamation, illegal material, or harmful speech. They may now be treated more like traditional publishers under the law.
- Broader Definitions: Terms like "interactive computer service" and "internet" are redefined or shifted to other sections (e.g., Section 223), potentially expanding who qualifies as a liable party without the old protections.
- Removal of Specific Carve-Outs: Laws that previously excused certain actions (e.g., deleting illegal content under Section 230) now lack those exceptions, which could increase scrutiny on platform decisions.
Potential Impacts
- On Government Agencies: Agencies like the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and Department of Justice may see increased enforcement roles in online content regulation, as platforms face higher legal risks without Section 230. This could lead to more investigations into illegal online activities.
- On Citizens: Users might experience stricter content moderation by platforms to avoid lawsuits, potentially reducing misinformation or harmful content but also limiting free expression. Individuals harmed by online content (e.g., victims of defamation or harassment) could more easily sue platforms.
- On International Relations: The repeal could affect U.S. tech companies operating globally, as foreign governments might impose their own rules on content, leading to tensions in data privacy and trade agreements. It may also influence how international platforms handle U.S.-based users.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- Online Platforms and Tech Companies: Social media giants (e.g., Meta, X), search engines (e.g., Google), and hosting services will face the most direct liability risks, possibly altering business models through heavier moderation or content restrictions.
- Content Creators and Users: Individuals posting or viewing online content may see changes in platform policies, affecting free speech, privacy, and access to information.
- Victims of Online Harm: People affected by illegal or damaging content (e.g., in cases of harassment, scams, or exploitation) could gain stronger legal recourse against platforms.
- Regulators and Law Enforcement: Federal agencies and state attorneys general will likely handle more cases involving online liability.
- Advertisers and Businesses: Companies relying on online platforms may encounter shifts in ad environments due to increased content controls.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal Implications: Without Section 230, courts may see a surge in lawsuits treating platforms as liable for user content, potentially overwhelming the judicial system. Existing laws on defamation, privacy, and obscenity will apply more directly to digital spaces.
- Constitutional Implications: The repeal could raise First Amendment (free speech) concerns, as platforms might over-moderate to avoid liability, chilling protected expression. It may also prompt challenges under the Fifth Amendment (due process) if platforms argue the change disrupts established business expectations.
- Political Implications: The bill reflects ongoing debates about tech accountability versus innovation, potentially polarizing Congress and the public. If enacted, it could shift power from private companies to regulators and users, influencing future internet policy without the balanced framework of Section 230.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Cosponsors (1)
Recent Actions
- 2026-01-13: Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
- 2026-01-13: Introduced in House
- 2026-01-13: Introduced in House
Bill Versions
- Promoting Responsible Online Technology and Ensuring Consumer Trust Act — issued 2026-01-13 — PDF (7 pages)