The U.S. Supreme Court did not appear ready to resolve major questions related to free speech on social media and the regulation of digital platforms after arguments on Monday over two controversial laws passed by Republican-controlled legislatures in Florida and Texas.

The lack of clarity over the outcome of the two cases, known as Moody v. Netchoice (Florida) and Netchoice v. Paxton (Texas), stemmed from procedural concerns as well as the possible breadth of the decision that most justices appeared to want to reach.

At issue were two laws enacted in 2021 in response to the perception among conservatives that social media companies were censoring or removing posts containing conservative political views. The two laws prohibit large social media platforms from banning, removing or hiding content based on its political viewpoint.

Netchoice, the lobbying arm of the tech industry, challenged the laws in court and won a preliminary injunction in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit blocking the Florida laws implementation while the 5th Circuit upheld Texas law. The state of Florida appealed the 11th Circuit decision and Netchoice appealed the 5th Circuit ruling to the Supreme Court.

In its appeal to the Supreme Court, Netchoice sought to have the Florida law thrown out entirely as unconstitutional. The lobbying group argued that content moderation done by social media platforms is no different from the permitted editorial discretion of newspapers, which the Supreme Court had granted with broad First Amendment protection in the 1970s.

Florida and Texas each argued that the platforms should not be treated like newspapers but instead as common carriers, such as telegraph, railroad and telephone companies, which are subject to nondiscrimination laws that prohibit favoring or preferring some individuals or companies over others. Their new laws, they argued, simply enforced similar rules on the content transmitted on platforms held open to the public.